HomeMy WebLinkAbout9. Hearing on Petition for the Annexation of Certain Lands in Jackson Township
'1
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
CASELOG NO.: 03-026
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Continued Public Hearing on Petition of David L. Voxland and Tollefson
Development for the Annexation of Certain Lands in Jackson Township
MEETING DATE: August 6, 2003
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION:
The City received petitions dated February 27, 2003 and March 4, 2003 for these 2 parcels, which
totaling 30.47 acres. See the attached memorandum for the June 17,2003 public hearing for
additional background information. The public hearing was continued twice to allow time for the
Township Board to review the petition. Attached to this memo is an e-mail from Supervisor Donald
Hedlund regarding the Township Board's review.
One ofthe petitioners has been working on a development proposal that involves on the order of
1100 housing units, the vast majority of which would be townhouses. A recent article in the
Shakopee Vallev News may have left some people with the impression that the proj ect contemplated
by that petitioner is a foregone conclusion. Council should be aware that several additional steps are
required for a project to occur. These include:
. Guiding the land for a specific use or set of uses - The land is not currently guided in the
City's 1999 Comprehensive Plan. While the discussion draft of the Plan Update does indicate
land use categories that could accommodate townhouse development, the Plan Update is far
from being adopted. Moreover, city staff is well aware that both the Planning Commission
and City Council have serious concerns about adding significant areas for attached housing
development. Staff fully expects that this area of the Plan Update may be amended
significantly if the Plan Update even moves forward. In very early discussions with the
developer's representative, the author of this report shared an overall vision for the area that
would have included much more single-family development, less townhouse development,
and as a result less overall density than contemplated by the developer.
. Zoning the Land
. Environmental Review - While the developer has informally asked that the City now prepare
an EA W, staff s position is that an EIS (a much longer process) is currently required because
the land is not currently guided in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
. PUD and or plat review by the Planning Commission and City Council
G: \CC\2003\08-05\annexphTheisvoxland0806.doc - 1 -
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Close the public hearing, and direct staff to prepare an ordinance annexing the subject properties
for consideration at the August 19,2003 meeting.
2. Close the public hearing and direct staff to prepare a resolution denying the petition for
annexation based on specific findings of fact for consideration at the August 19,2003 meeting.
3. Close the public hearing, but table the request for additional information.
4. Continue the public hearing to August 19,2003 for additional information.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
In connection with the previous, related annexation of the Theis, Baur, and Shakopee Training
Farm properties, as well as a PUD concept plan review conducted on May 8, 2003 has reviewed
the proposed land uses. At that time concerns were expressed about a number of elements
including the type and density of development, the amount and type of park and open space areas,
and trail and walk connections.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer a motion consistent with the Council's wishes relative to the instant petition.
The Council should also provide direction to staff to develop limits on annexation activity pending
the completion of Transportation Plan and Storm Water Management Plan updates and/or on the
basis oflimiting annual extensions of MUS A. 4~
R. Michael Leek
Community Development Director
G: \CC\2003\08-05\annexphTheisvoxland0806.doc - 2 -
Michael leek
From: Hedlund, Don [don.hedlund@jostens.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 3:40 PM
To: 'Michael Leek'
Subject: RE: TheisNoxland Annexation
Yes, the annexation request was reviewed by the Township Board.
Main discussion item: The high density of the proposed development.
Other discussion item: The intersection of 17th Ave and Cty Rd 15.
Nobody
wants another Verling Dr./Cty 17.
There was no discussion of any objection by the Township Board.
Michael, I suggested that the Board send a letter to the City with the
above
information, but it was decided not to.
Thanks for following up.
Donald L. Hedlund
Supervisor, Jackson Township
645 128th St. W.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Bus. 952-838-7594
Home 952-445-3061
hedlund@jostens.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Leek [mailto:MLeek@ci.shakopee.mn.us]
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 2:30 PM
To: 'Hedlund, Don' ; Mitchell, Gina (Scott Co)
Subject: RE: Theis/Voxland Annexation
Importance: High
Hello Don-
Did the Township Board review the Theis/Voxland annexation request last
week, and if so, what comments, if any, did it have so I can report back
to
the City Council next Wednesday?
Thank you.
Michael Leek
Community Development Director
City of Shakopee, MN 55379
Phone 952.496-9677, Fax 952.233-3801
e-mail address: mleek@ci.shakopee.mn.us
-----Original Message-----
From: Hedlund, Don [mailto:don.hedlund@jostens.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 7:49 AM
To: 'Mitchell, Gina'
Cc: 'mleek@ci.shakopee.mn.us'
Subject: RE: Theis/Voxland Annexation
I was out of the office yesterday afternoon so did not get Michael's
email
until this morning. I have not heard anything from anyone relative to
this
1
.
'"' /
.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
CASELOG NO.: 03-026
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Petition of David L. Vox land and Tollefson Development
for the Annexation of Certain Lands in Jackson Township
MEETING DATE: June 17,2003
INTRODUCTION:
The City received petitions dated February 27, 2003 and March 4, 2003 for these 2 parcels, which
totaling 30.47 acres. Copies of the petitions are attached for the Council's information. Council is
asked to conduct a public hearing on the petition, and to provide staff direction relative to Council's
decision regarding whether to annex the subject properties.
DISCUSSION:
Orderly Annexation Agreement (OAA):
The agreement between the City and the Township defines the process by which annexation will take
place, but does not set forth specific staging or limitations relative to the pace of annexation.
However, the discussions that led to the OAA centered on concerns that property not be annexed
prematurely, resulting in unnecessary loss of tax base to Jackson Township. In other words, it
seemed to be consensus of the group that negotiated the OAA that properties annexed into the City
should be ripe for development within about 1-2 years. Based on the Council's recent decision on the
previous, but related petition for annexation it seems reasonable to conclude that annexation of these
parcels would result in development within a reasonable timeframe as contemplated in arriving at the
OM.
Jackson Township Comment:
At the time this report was prepared, comment had not been received from the Township regarding
this petition.
Land Use/MUSA:
The petitioners have had discussions with Tollefson Development Company (Tollefson) regarding
the purchase and development ofthe subject properties. Tollefson, in turn, has shared with the
~
G:\CC\2003\06-17\annexphTheisvoxland.doc - 1 -
.
""
-
Township, City staff, and County staff a general concept for land uses on the subject property. This
includes substantial areas of high-density and medium-density residential, as well as single-family
and neighborhood commercial.
The City's adopted Land Use Plan identifies this area for single-family density development. This
designation was based on direction received from Council in the course of previous discussions
between the Township and the City. With the assistance of Northwest Associated Consultants
(NAC), the City is in the process of updating its Comprehensive and Land Use Plans.
At a recent workshop NAC shared some general concepts for this area that would include higher-
density residential uses than are shown in the adopted Land Use Plan. The types of land uses that are
appropriate for the subject property are in part dictated by the character ofthe roads that abut the
subject property, as well as roads planned to run through the subject site (i.e. 1 ih Avenue). T.H.169
is, of course, a high-volume principal arterial. Traditional planning principles would suggest a
transitional land use (such as commercial or medium-density residential) immediately adjacent to
such an arterial.
Tollefson would propose the development ofthe subject properties, as well as the area that Council
previously annexed. In total, this would represent the extension of MUSA to properties totaling
about 7% ofthe City's ten-year allocation of MUS A, or almost a year's allocation. The City has
already annexed more acreage from Jackson Township in 2003 than the staff analysis conducted
earlier this year concluded would be allocated. Council should provide staff with direction on
whether it wishes to consider future limitations on the annexation based on the rate and amount of
MUSA it wishes to allocate.
Should the Council decide that the subject properties should be annexed into the City, that action
does not constitute a guarantee of any particular land use guiding or zoning. Both guiding and zoning
will need to be determined after separate public processes once the property is within the City's
jurisdiction.
Infrastructure:
Roads:
The subject properties are bounded by county roads, i.e. CSAH 79 and 15 (Marystown Road).
Seventeenth Avenue would extend east west through. the area. 17th Avenue is currently a 4-1ane City
collector street. Long-term intentions on the part of the County have been to have 1 ih A venue turned
over to the County. There is no agreement currently for the "turn back" of 17th Avenue, as it would
run through the subject property. The County is currently preparing a corridor study for 17th Avenue.
Among the issues that the study will/will need to address is access spacing.
City staff believes that a needed update ofthe City's Transportation Plan should include an analysis
of future system needs in Jackson Township before too much development occurs in the area.
Council should consider, and provide direction to staff on whether develop limits on annexation
G:\CC\2003\06-17\annexphTheisvoxland.doc -2-
.
activity pending the completion of Transportation Plan updates and/or on the basis oflimiting annual
extensions of MUS A until those plans, as well as water planning, are updated.
Sanitary Sewer:
The Chaska illterceptor runs through this area, and has sufficient capacity (which the City has already
paid for) for development of the subject properties.
Water:
Water service needs to be extended to the subject properties from existing development to the east.
The time line for extending and looping this service are issues that need to be specifically addressed
with the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.
Storm Sewer:
Surface water drainage systems are not established for this area of the township, and would need to be
resolved as a part of any future development of the subj ect property. As with the Transportation
Plan, Bruce Loney, the Public Works Director, and I agree that it is important to update the City's
Storm Water Plan to include Jackson Township before too much development takes place in this
area. The Council should discuss whether it wishes to direct staff to develop limits on annexation
activity pending the completion of Transportation Plan and Storm Water Management Plan updates
and/or on the basis of limiting annual extensions of MUS A.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Close the public hearing, and direct staffto prepare an ordinance annexing the subject properties
for consideration at the July 1, 2003 meeting.
2. Close the public hearing and direct staff to prepare a resolution denying the petition for
annexation based on specific findings of fact for consideration at the January 21, 2003 meeting.
3. Close the public hearing, but table the request for additional information.
4. Continue the public hearing to July 1, 2003 or July 15, 2003 for additional information.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
ill connection with the previous, related annexation of the Theis, Baur, and Shakopee Training
Farm properties, as well as a PUD concept plan review conducted on May 8, 2003 has reviewed
the proposed land uses. At that time concerns were expressed about a number of elements
including the type and density of development, the amount and type of park and open space areas,
and trail and walk connections.
ACTION REQUESTED:
G:\CC\2003\06-17\annexphTheisvoxland.doc - 3 -
.
Offer a motion consistent with the Council's wishes relative to the instant petition.
The Council should also provide direction to staff to develop limits on annexation activity pending
the completion of Transportation Plan and Storm Water Management Plan updates and/or on the
basis of limiting annual extensions of MUS A.
_6&;~~~
R. Michael Leek
Community Development Director
G:\CC\2003\06-17\annexphTheisvoxland.doc - 4-
.-
..
i! J
. ! .
i.............,; 8TH 169
. .. .. ..-.......~......... ,..
I )/
,I Vl
I , . " . , . , "
! 1 /. . . ! '
j ..' ,_ ,-. I ; ,! .... .
, I~ ,.,' ,
\ ' ;" .., :. ...... .. "m ..... ....... . . ...... .... .....
, .
.
.
.
-, .
.
"j ~
! .
, . -
...........'m . ................ .m......_... .................
.
.
.
____Ii~
'-..- ice} _: ----.-.- -. '---
,. ....11\ .
-- L1i 1:--:-=-:: --~~~:+::<..~.. "'." " "" ""." : I
II I .... .......1
...... ,........ ...~ll
Ill......., :." """'/A';;:.:;.' I':
I j .m......... .....1 i i . .' I
1:1 jl!; ... '" ...:::'.'; (.,..J.... ': i " .. \....... .....,....,
"I ............................. m.. . , I' I ".1 I '.. , r--r-
I j.....r....J I .' . ....... "". . I \
N
~ W+E
CoMM1JNllY PRIDE SINCE 1857 S
Annexation of Property from Jackson
Township to City of Shakopee
<,,'
:;
_ Subject Property
.".. Municipal Boundary
...........
.....'....,.. Jackson Township Parcels
CJ Zoning Boundary
D Parcel Boundary
.
In the Matter of the Petition of
David L. V oxland PETITION
for Annexation Pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Section 414.0325
Petitioner, as and for its Petition to the City of Shakopee, a Milmesota municipal
corporation, hereby states as follows:
1. That the real property which is the subj ect of this Petition is situated in the County of
Scott, State ofMimlesota, and legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto.
2. That Petitioner is the fee owner ofthe real property described in paragraph 1 hereof.
3. That the real property described in paragraph 1 hereof presently lies within the
boundaries of Jackson Township and abuts the boundaries of the City of Shakopee, a Milmesota
municipal corporation.
4. That the real property set out in paragraph 1 hereof is subject to the terms of a Joint
Resolution for Orderly A1mexation between the Town of Jackson and the City of Shakopee, a
tme and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
5. That the Joint Resolution satisfies the requirements ofMimlesota Statutes 9414.035.
That neither the Town of Jackson nor the City of Shakopee provide electric utility service;
therefore the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 9414.0325, Subd. l(a) do not apply.
6. That the intended use of the real property described in paragraph 1 hereof is for single-
family and multi-family residences which require the provision of municipal services, including
but not limited to, sewer, water and utilities.
.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays for a Resolution of the City of Shakopee approving the
annexation by the City of Shakopee, a Minnesota municipal corporation of the real property
described on Exhibit A attached hereto.
PETITIONER:
/~l 4
4ttJ~/:;11/~/
David L. Vox land
Dated this S47day ofFeb11lary, 2003
.
VOXLAND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Property Description
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 13, Township 115,
Range 23, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at a point in the west line of said Northwest Quarter 130.82 feet north of the
southwest comer thereof; thence North 0 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, assumed basis for
bearings, along said west line, 326.50 feet; thence North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East
1335.85 feet to the east line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, thence South 0
degrees 35 minutes 36 seconds West, along said east line 326.52 feet; thence South 90 degrees
00 minutes 00 seconds West 1332.46 feet to the point of beginning.
Eilw'/)/I- Ie
.
In the Matter of the Petition of
Tollefson Development, Inc., a
Minnesota corporation PETITI01'l
for Annexation Pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes. Section 414.033
Petitioner, as and for its Petition to the City of Shakopee. a Minnesota municIpal
corporation. hereby states as follows:
1. That the real property which is the subject of this Petition is situated in the County of
Scott, Statc of Minnesota., and legally described on Exhibit A attached hetcto~
2. That Petitioner is the fee ownet ofthe real property described in paragraph 1 hereof.
3. That the real property described in paragraph 1 hereof presently lies within the
boundaries of Jackson To'\.VtIship and abuts the boundaries of the City of Shako pee, a Minnesota
munictpal corporation.
4.. That the real property set out in paragraph 1 hereof is subj e;ct to the terms of a Joint
Resolution fOt Orderly Annexation between the Town of Jackson and the City of Shakopec. a
tnlcand correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
5. That the Joint Resolution satIsfies the requirements of Minnesota Statutes S41 4.035.
That neither the Town of Jackson nor the City of Shako pee provide electric utility service;
therefore the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 9414.0325, Subd. l(a) do not a.pply.
G. That the intended use of the real property described in paragraph 1 hereofis for single-
famtly and multi-family residences which require the provision of municipal services. including
but not limited to. sewer. water and utilities.
,
-
WHEREFORE. Petitioner prays for a Resolution of the City of Shako pee approving the
annexation by the City of Shako pee, a Minnesota munictpal corpora.tion ofthe real property
dcscribed on Ex1ubit A attached hereto.
PETITIONER:
TOLLEFSON DEVELOPMENT, INC-
BT-~~~
Dated this tjlol.{day of March, 2003 Its: (/7JLe:...-. O~.5J"dcV\ /
.
Exhibit A
Tollefson Property (purchased from School District)
PID: 69130020
Area Parcel A (school property survey): 20.73 Acres
Parcel A
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 115, Range
23, Scott County, Minnesota, together with that part of the North Half of the Southeast Quarter
of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 13, which lies northerly ofthe following described line:
Beginning at the northeast comer of said North Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter; thence westerly to a point on the west line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter distant 175.81 feet south of the northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the
Northeast QUaJ.1er and said line there tenninating.
Except that part thereof contained within Milll1esota Department of Transportation Right-of-Way
Plat No. 70-20 as on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder.
AND
Together with that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 13
which lies southerly of the following described line;
Commencing at the northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence
along the east line thereof, South 02 degrees 07 minutes 07 seconds East, assumed basis of
bearings, a distance of 755.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence
South 87 degrees 52 minutes 53 seconds West 1348.00 feet to a point on the west line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, distant thereon 906.50 feet southerly of the
northwest corner thereof, and there terminating;
Except that part thereof contained within Minnesota Department of Transportation Right-of-Way
Plat No. 70-20 as on file and of record inthe office of the County Recorder.
--- --- ---- . . c...,.l"......._
"
" "
, ' ,.
JOINT RESOLUTION FOR ORDERLY ANNEXATION BElWEEN .
THE TOWN OF JACKSON & THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee (hereinafter referred to as the "City") and the Township of
Jackson (hereinafter referred to as the "TownshipJ'), both located entirery within Scott County in
the State of Minnesota, desire to accommodate growth in the most orderly fashion, and have
agreed that there is a clear need for cooperative future planning for the land governed by the
two jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS. the City of Shakopee and the Township of Jackson have established a committse
to develop a joint orderly annexation agreement which has extensively discussed, studied, and
evaluated, pertinent issues regarding annexation and planning; and
WHEREAS, the Township Board and City Council have expressed their desire to encourage
future development of land near the City so as to promote the development of municipal
servioes and urban growth as much as is practical, while encouraging the retention of land in
agricultural use and increasing the longevity of existing rural residential lifestyles; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee andthe Towns~ip of Jackson are independent local
governing authorities who represent the interests of the geographic areas and their constituents;
and
WHEREAS! it is desired and expressly understood that decisions of said governing authorities.
irrespective of an agreement on a process for'ordsrly annexation, will continue to be made by
,each respective authority; and
WHEREAS, a joint orderly annexation agreement is beneficial to both parties from the
standpoint of orderly planning and orderly transition of government within the area proposed to
be annexed, and provides the guidelines under which such annexation shall take place.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED. in consideration of the mutual terms and conditions
that follow, the City end Township enter into this Joint Resolution for Orderly Annexation and
that the property herein described may be annexed in the future by the City, and at the time
annexation is proposed, it shall occur, or may be applied for, subject to the following terms and
conditions:
Sect/cm 1- Administration
1. Iv1innesota MuniCipal Board Jurisdiction. Upon approval by the Township Soard and the
City Council, this Jaint Resolution shall confer jurisdiction upon the Minnesota Municipal
Board. or its designated successor (hereinafter referred to as the "Municipal Board") so
as to accomplish said orderly annexations in accordance with the terms of this Joint '
Resolution. This function is currently the responsibility the Office of Strategic and Long
Range Planning, Municipal Boundary Adjustments.
2. Review and Comment bY' the Municipal Board. The Township and City mutually agree
and state that this Joint Resolution and Agreement sets forth all the conditions for
712212002 ~~ Page 1 of 9
. .'
"
annexation and that no consideration by the Municipal Board is necessary for individual
annexations which occur in accordance with this agreement. The Board may review and
comment, but shall, within thirty (30) days, order the annexation in accordance with the
terms of this Joint Resolution.
3. No Alteration of Boundaries. The Township and City mutually agree and state that no
alterations by the Municipal Board of the stated boundaries of the area designated for
orderly annexation is appropriate.
4. Authorization. The applicable legislative bodies of the Township and City, as well as the
Executive Director of the Municipal Board, are hereby authorized to carry the terms of
this Joint Resolution into effect.
5. Severabilitv and Repealer. A determination that a provision of this Joint Resolution IS
unlawful or unenforceable shall not effect the validity or enforceability of the other
provisions herein.
6. Geoaraohlc Limitation for Annexation. All of the land in thE' Township is subject to
orderly anne~ation in accordance with this agreement under and pursuant to State
Statute, subject to the provisions contained herein.
7. state Statute. The terms.and conditions of this agreement are created as an addition or
complement to the requirements for annexation required by law. The language
contained herein shall in no way be deemed to circumvent or reduce requirements
established by law. If changes to State statute are enacted during the duration of this
agreement that are more restrictive or otherwise negate the provisions herein, the state
statute shall rule.
8. ' Effective Date/Applicability. This Joint Resolution shall be effective upon adoption by the
legislative bodies ofthe Township and City and acceptance by the Municipal Board.
This agreement shall be applicable for any annexation petition filed or initiated while the
agreement is in effect. Should this agreement be terminated following the filing of a
petition for annexation, but prior to final action ,an that annexation by the City, the
provisions of this agreement shall be binding unless otherwise modified by a joint
resolution of both the Township and the City.
9. Annexation bv Ordinance. Annexatron shall be accomplished according to the terms of
this Joint Resolution and Minn. stat. $ 414.033, subd. 2. ~l~':7;:'C. .l ::">t* ';!c..{ ~;,l ~t'i>,.;.",/"rf"l /.> .... I
) ~.(J
10. Duration of Aoreement. This Agreement shall be in force and binding from the effective
date as identified herein, and shall continue to remain in effect until the Township and
City replace or renew this Agreement with an amended joint agreement and resolution
for orderly annexation.
11. Mediation/Arbitration. If a dispute of the terms or conditions of this agreement arises,
the Town and City hereby agree to enter into mediation to attempt to resolve this
dispute. Mediation services shall be provided by a state agency or other third party
representative agreed to by both the Township and the City. If mediation is
unsuccessful, the Township and City hereby agree to enter into binding arbitration to
resolve disputes under this agreement. Mediation and arbitration shall be conducted in
accordance with state statutes.
7/2.2/2002 Page 2 or 9
I _o\J ...._ ---- -- --
12. Amendment an'd Pre-mature Termination. Both parties reserve the right to initiate an
amendment or revision to this Agreement at any time. However, once in effect, any
amendment 'or revisIon to this Agreement shall require a joint resolution approved by
both the Township and the City, as well as acceptance by the Municipal Board. Both
parties reserve the right to initiate the pre-mature termination of this Agreement.
However, termination of this Agreement shall require a joint resolution approved by both
the Township and the City. This Agreement shall terminate immediately upon approval
of both legislative bodies and acceptance by the Municipal Board.
13. Planninq and Land Use Control Authoritv. The Township and City mutually agree and
state that a Joint Board, which shall be known as the Jackson/Shakopee Joint Orderly
Annexation Board, wi!! be established between the Township, City, and Scott County
pursuant to Minn: Stat. ~ 414,0325 concurrently with this Agreement. Upon the
Municipal Board's Order for Annexation, the land use and planning authority of the
annexed territory shall rest with the City.
14. City Development Standards. The Township and City mutually agree and state that there
is an inherent financial benefit to utilize City development standards within orderly
annexation areas that wilf readily allow far the future extension of public utilities.
Furthermore, the Township and the City agree to work with Scott County government to
create, support, and develop standards that minimize the amount of infrastructure, and --
potential assessment costs, associated with annexation.
15. Joint Notification. Upon receiving or initiating a Petition for annexation. the City shall
send a copy of the petition, resolution, proposed plans, and other relevant information to
the Township. This provision shall be considered in concert with, and not necessarily in
addition to, any required or existing notification procedure maintained by the City or
required by State Statute.
16. Joint Planninq MeetinQs. The Township and City mutually agree and state that they will
conduct a minimum of two (2) joint planning meetings in each calendar year. The
purpose of these meetings is for general communication, specifically, to discuss
potential" amendments to this Agreement, to discuss specific development proposals or
annexation petitions, obtain feedback on planning studies/capital improvement projects,
or any other related topics. Times for meetings shall be determined jointly by the
Township and City. To initiate a meeting, the legislative body of either the Township or
City shall direct a written request to the legislative body of the other party. At a
minimum, one elected official of each legislative body shall be required to attend the
meeting.
Section II-Initiation of Annexation, Petition
1. Requirements of Section. In addition to any requirements identified by state statute, all
petitions for annexation, or initiation of annexation, shall occur in accordance with the
provisions identified by this section. Where state statute allows for a petition to be filed
or initiated not in conformance with this section of the Agreement, the legislative body of
the City hereby agrees that favorable action will not occur on said petition without the
prior or concurrent amendment of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions
identified herein.
7/22/2002 p,gge 3 of 9
I L.-.L.J ..l,...J t;..l:...lt-lw .&.'-'~ ~...,j
, --
2. Property Owner Initiated Adiacency Reouirements The following standards shall be
used to determine adjacency when a property owner, or combination of multiple property
owners with contiguous property. initiates annexation of property: A property, or
combination of contiguous properties, shall be considered adjacent to the City when fifty
(50) linear feet or more of the subject annexation area boundary is shared with the
boundary of the City.
3. City Initiated Annexation Adjacency ReqUirements The following standards shall be
used to determine adjacency when the City initiates annexation of property:
a) Undeveloped property - Fifty (50) percent contiguous shaH be defined as at least
fifty (50) percent of the boundary of the subject property, or combination of
contiguous properties, is adjacent to the City and/or Township limits.
b) Developed property . Completely surrounded shall be defined as one hundred
(100) percent of the boundary of the subject property. or combination of
contiguous properties, is adjacent to the City and/or Township limits.
c) Township Limit - For the purposes of this document, the Township limit shall be
defined as those portions of thsouter boundary of the Township, not adjacent to
the City, adjacent to other Townships, or jurisdictional boundaries.
4. property Owner Petition. Any landowner!. or combination of multiple landowners, with
property adjacent to the municipal boundary of the City, may petition the City to annex
their property in accordance with this Agreement.
5. Subdivision Definition. For the purposes of this agreement, a subdivision is defined as
one or more lots platted through the provisions identified within the Scott County
Subdivision Control Ordinance, as from time to time amended. For those lots that pre-
date the Subdivision ControLOrdinance, a subdivision shall be considered one or more
parcels of land established by lot and block number descriptions rather than a metes and
bounds property description.
6. Existinq Subdivision Petition. A simple majority of land owners within a subdivision
based on the total number of lots. when the subdivision boundary is contiguous to the
municipal boundary of the City, may petition the City to annex the entire subdivision in
accordance with this agreement In addition, residential developments platted under the
Urban Expansion Reserve provisions of the County Zoning Ordinance may be petitioned
in their entirety by the owner. or owners, of a simple majority of the total property of the
subdivision, including the outlot(s) reserved for future development. A petition to annel(
a residential subdivision which developed under the Urban Expansion Reserve Zoning
provisions of the County Zoning Ordinance may not be considered valid unless it
includes all the gross property of the subdivision,' including developed/platted lots,
outlot(s), and any public or commonly owned property as applicable. Any existing
subdivision petitioning for annexation in accordance with this provision shall be
considered a petition of all the representative property owners for the purpose of this
agreement. The separate provisions identified when the City initiates annexation shall
not apply.
7/2212002 Page <1 of 9
. rt=.J:j- ..l-.:l-~~.fI':J...J .LU. ..-!"""t
.;,
7. Initiation of Annexation bY City for Undeveloped Property. The City may at anytime, -
without a petition of the property owners, annex undeveloped property, or multiple
properties, within the Township which are at least fifty (50) percent surrounded by the
municipal boundary of the City, based on the perimeter of the entire area to be annexed.
For the purposes of this Agreement, whether or not a property is developed shall be
determined at the time of initiation of the annexation, based on existing conditions or
approved and recorded plans, whichever is more restrictive. A property shall be
considered developed if it meets one of the following criteria:
a) Residential subdivisionsflots with a gross density greater than one (1) dwelling
unit for every five (5) acres of land based on either the number of dwelling units
or lots, whichever is greater, Residential developments platted under the Urban
Expansion Reserve Zoning provisions of the County Zoning Ordinance shall
include the outlot(s) reserved forfuture development as part ofthe calculation of
gross density, where applicable.
b) Non-residential development with 1,000 square feet of principal and/or accessory
building coverage per acre or greater.
For the purposes ofthis Agreement, a dwelling unit shall be defined as a residential
building or portion thereof intended for occupancy by one (1) or more persons with
faciliti~s for tiving,slseping,cooking,eating,and restrooms. Motels, hotels; rooming
hOUses, nursing homes, manufactured home parks, campgrounds, and similar
facilities shall be considered commercial and not residential. Tents, seasonal cabins,
motor homes, travel trailers, and other similar temporary or moveable facilities shall
not be considered a dwelling unit
Land which is tax exempt, publicly owned, utilized for utiHty or transportation
purposes, or other similar property shall be considered undeveloped.
8. Initiation of Annexation bV City for DeveloDed Property. The City may at anytime,
without a petition of the property owners, annex developed property or multiple adjacent
properties within the Township completely surrounded by the municipal boundary of the
City, subject to the following additional conditions:
a) Certified Notice of Intent to Annsx- The City shall provide a minimum of one (1)
year notice by certified mail to each property owner within a developed area prior
to initiating annexation. This certified notice shaH also be sent to the Township.
This notlce shall be considered additional to any requirements established by
state statute. The notice shall include the following information:
1. Imorovements - all proposed improvements with an estimated installation
date and approximate assessment cost (if applicable).
2. Benefits - the major proposed services/benefits that are planned to occur
simultaneously with annexation. Benefits suitable for notification shall be
at the discretion of the City, but are intended to include, but not be limited
to, police and fire services, street maintenance, and park system benefits.
3. Tax Rates - the existing City tax rate compared to the existing Township
tax rate. The notice shall also include the estimated date when the new
7/22/2Q02 Page 5 of 9
I ....U -
~' ,
.
tax rate would take effect and first be payable to the City. Although an
individual analysis of each property is not required, at least one
representative example shall be provided that illustrates a typical before
and after effect between City and Township taxes identified in dollars per
year. The purpose of this provision is to provide general information to
property owners within a proposed annexation area.
.4. Timeline for Annexation - the anticipated schedule for future notice,
public hearing dates, and the ultimate effective date of annexation.
Although individual dates and times need not be identified. the purpose of .
this provision is to make residents aware of the general chronology of
annexation in accordance with statute and the provisions of this
Agreement.
b) Public Meeting Reguired - The City shall conduct a public informational meeting
on the proposed annexation plans within ninety (90) days of the certified notice.
The date, time. location, and purpose of this meeting shall be identified as parfof
the certified notice of annexation. The purpose of this meeting is to provide
general information to the public and solicit public input on required infrastruoture
improvements.
c) Effective Date of Annexation - City approval ofthe Resolution foranhexatibl1 .- n__' .
shall not be submittedto the Munjcip~1 Board earlier than one (1) year from the
date of approval of the Resolution. The effective date of annexation shall be the
date of Municipal Board approval.
d) Assessment Period - The pay back time an assessments for improvements
associated with annexation Shall be for a period not to exceed ten (10) years.
Individual property owners may request the City to consider increasing the
payback time on assessments toa maximum period of twenty (20) years,
however, the consideration shall be gUided as follows:
1. Propertv Owner Inff:lafed Annexation -:. Approval of any requested.
extension is solely in the discretion of the City.
2. Citv Initiated Annexation.~.Alth6ugh the City has the right to review and.
approve assessment payback times, the burden shall be on the City to
identify valid reasons why an assessment should not be extended at the
request of an individual property owner. To be considered valid,
assessment e>..1ension requests shall be made prior to or as part of the
hearing process required for annexation. Any dispute to this provision
shall be governed by the Mediation/Arbitration provision of this
agreement.
e) Public Water and Sewer SeNice - To reduce pre-mature assessment costs to
developed property, publ1c water and sanitary sewer need only be provided to
developed areas where there is either an existing or eminent health concern
identified by the City, or where the extension of services is part of the
implementation of the City's long range utility plans. At any time, property
owners may also petition the City for the extension of services. At that time, the
City shall prepare a plan/concept outlining how, when, and at what cost services
7/2212002 Pags 6 of 9
I lo.o.... __ ----- - - -.
.
might be provided. The' City shall allow for input on the prepared plan/concept ,
prior to proceeding with implementing the request and assessing the cost to
individual property owners. The intent of this provision is to allow property
owners to evaluate the cost/benefit of services where other health concerns or
the implementation of long range plans does not exist.
f) Township Requested Improvements- The Township, on behalf of the proposed
annexation area, may request that specific improvements be installed to address
a specific problem and/or deficiency. To be considered by the City, the Township
shall notify the City of any requested improvements prior to or as part of the first
public hearing, as required by state statute. Any request made after that time
shall not have standing andrnay be considered solely at the discretion of the
City. If no agreement can be reached regarding the need for the requested
improvements within the annexation area, the annexation may not proceed until
the disputed installation of improvements is resolved in accordance with the
. Mediation/Arbltrationportion of this Agreement.
Section 11/ - Municipal Reimbursement
1. Municipal Reimbursement It is generally recognized that the fiscal planning for any
government entity occurs in the calendaryearprior to the actual expenditures.
Whereas, the annexation of property could pose a hardship on the Township having
planned for a certain income that is no longer available upon annexation. To address
this potential hardship, the Township and City mutually agree and state that, pursuant to
state statute, a reim~ursement from the City to the Township shall occur for the taxes
collected on land annexed' into the City. Reimbursement shall occur as identified herein.
Any and all of the applicable property taxes collected in the area designated for Orderly
Annexation shall remain the property of the Township. Excepting required
reimbursement, upon annexation, any and all property taxes collected from the annexed
properties shall be the property of the City. Reimbursement from the City to the
Township shall occur as follows:
a) Rate/Amount - The City shall reimburse the lownship by substantially equal
cash payments for a period of (2) years. The amount of the reimbursement shall
.".. .. . be based on the assessed value of the annexed property as of January 2af the
year the parcel is annexed. The ~/ear the property is annexed shall be
determined by the date of Municipal Board approval.
b) Reimbursement Schedule..-,The City shall reimburse,the Township with the
amount of funds as determined herein. Cash installment payments to the
Township shall be made to the Township sixty (60) days from the date the semi-
annual tax settlement is received by the City for the proportional amount of taxes
that would have been due the Township without annexation. Installment
payments shall be mads until the required amount of funds is paid in full. The
City may at any time choose to reimburse the Township in full and forego all or
the remainder of installment payments.
2. Tax Exempt Prooertv. Where a property is annexed that is publicly owned or is currently
exempt from local property taxes, the exemption shall be maintained and no
reimbursement shall be required from the City to the Township.
7/22/2002 Page 7 01 9
,". .
.
3. Bonded Improvements. The Township may bond for capital expenditures In aocordance
with applicable state statutes. However, the Township shall be solely responsible for
bearing the costs associated with paying back the bond unless a previous agreement is
reached between the Township and the City,
Section IV - Miscellaneous Conditions.
1, Annual Area Limits. Within any given ca[endar year, the City shall be limited to a
maximum area it may annex without property owner petitions. The City shall be limited
to a maximum City~inltiated annexation area of two hundred and fifty (250) acres per
calendar year of developed and undeveloped property combined. For the purposes of
this: agreement, pUblicly owned property, or property currently exempt from local
property taxesj shall not apply or count toward the maximum area limitation.
2. Township Requested Annexation. Over time, it is likely that pockets or islands of the
Township will be created due to annexation. At which time, the Township may
determine that it is either a financial burden or undesirable to provide service to specific
properties. To alleviate the effects of continual annexation and the creation of pockets
and islands, the Township may at anytime require the City to annex properties that are
-. completely, surrounded by theGitY,as defined within this Agreement. Annexation
requested by the Township is subject totha following:
aJ The Township shall notify the City of this request by certified mail identifying all
properties requested to be annexed.
b) The City shall have a period of one (1) year from the date of notification to initiate
the annexation of the properties associated with the request.
c) No reimbursement shall bs required from the City to the Township for Township
requested annexation of property.
d) There shall be no size or area limitation placed on Township requested
annexation initiated by the City.
3. Exemption for Court Ordered Extension of Services. The Township and City recognize
that a situation may come to exist that a judicial decision may be made that requires the
City to extend water, sewer, or other municipal service to a portion of the Township. If a
legally binding court order exists with no possibility of further disruption on appeal, and'
the contract for the extension of services has been completed, the annexation of that
property may be initiated by the City in accordance with the Township requested
annexation provisions of this Agreement in the preceding section, rather than the more
stringent City initiated provisions. In cases where the order is relative to only a portion of
a residential subdivision, the annexation may include the entire subdivision to facilitate
the extension of services, at the discretion of the City.
4. Road Maintenance. If land is annexed into the City whereby ownership extends to the
centerline of a Township road, the City shall assume maintenance of said road.
712212002 Page 8 of 9
I.~J,;J .1....J '-t~~_ -- --
. .,
. '.
,
JACKSON TOWNSHIP
Approved this d.~~ay of ~d1f ,20 &11.
By: 4~/)J~ Attested to: ~~~
Norbert Theis, Chair Rose Menke, Clerk
Jackson Township
Dated: M Io~ UtJ Q.. Dated: if{.;I,. '~A
,- .
Approved as to Form:
Dated:
.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Approved this jt4-- (1),~ ' 20..Q..:h. by the City of Shakopee.
- day of
C
C~!j ~ lJqclJ d1.
By: 'Q I -' --- Attested to:
William P. Mars,~ayor Mark McNeill, City Administrator
. City of Shakopee,
Dated: '2- ? -D d.. Dated: ~ q; (,10'(
By: By: -.
+E.
James J.
Dated: 8-~-e;s. Dated: "1" 7 -0 ~
7(22/Z002 Page 9 of 9
TnTOI P lIIq
q.
City Wide Land Use Plan
The first phase for MUSA expansion encompasses the Jackson Township annexation
area in the southwest corner of the community. This area rated high in the ease of
providing sanitary sewer and storm sewer utility. The area provides opportunities for
commercial, industrial and residential land use development. Additionally, this area
includes transportation improvements that are important to the City of Shako pee related
to the Highway 169/County Road 69 interchange.
Other MUSA phases do not offer the land use diversity or the critical transportation
improvements identified in the proposed Phase I area. As such, they received a lower
priority for community investment and development.
Te;';:m'arra;ge'i';l:h'ei,qpaeei"~of"g;r9~~'\:'an'd;';ttft~~;~;iftyt;STj;?,it'l~sstttt~nt;:irn;;)pUb'fic infrastructUre I "the'W
following growth mana;gem&nestr~t~g'resshdi:1ld be foHowed:)9
1, Developer/benefiting property owners will assume all or a significant majority of
improvement service costs and agree to pay assessments associated with
extending services and utilities to their property.
2. Developers will acknowledge and hold all governmental units harmless should
limitations on sewer hookups or MUSA land reserve be imposed.
3. The City will not approve a development or subdivision that qualifies as
premature based on the following criteria:
I~" Consistency with the Comprehensive, Plan including any of the following:
. ~~; a.
.,.t~,
t 1 ) Land use plan.
~:. 2) Transportation plan.
!l1f'
. 3) Utility (sewer and water) plans.
4) Local water management plan.
~iIi': 5) Capital improvement plan.
;1:',"
ti~~~~.:
I 15, Consistent with infill policies, A proposed urban subdivision shall meet the
. City's infill policies:
, '
:~., 1 ) The urban subdivision must be located within the Metropolitan
Urban Service Area (MUSA).
II 2) The cost of utilities and street extensions must be covered by one
i~~.. , or more of the following:
I
a) An immediate assessment to the proposed subdivision.
W:
~ City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan Update
,.' 31
II
.-----
i
. I
J-'
City Wide Land Use Plan
b) , One hundred (100) percent of the street and utility costs are
privately financed by the developer.
c) The cost of regional and/or oversized trunk utility lines can
be financed with available City trunk funds,
d) The cost and timing of the expenditure of City funds are
consistent with the City's capital improvement plan.
3) The cost, operation and maintenance of the utility system are
consistent with the normal costs and reflected in the City's water
and sewer rates.
4) The developer payments will offset additional costs of utility
installation or future operation and maintenance.
c. Roads or Highways to Serve the Subdivision. A proposed subdivision
shall meet the following requirements for level of service (LOS), as defined
by the Highway Capacity Manual:
1) If the existing level of service outside of the proposed subdivision is
A or B, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade
the level of service more than one grade.
2) If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is C, traffic
generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of
service below C.
3) If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is 0, traffic
generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of
service below D.
4) The existing LOS must be 0 or better for all streets and
intersections providing access to the subdivision. If the existing
level of service is E or F, the subdivision developer must provide, as
part of the proposed project, improvements needed to ensure a
level of service 0 or better.
5) Existing roads and intersections providing access to the subdivision
must have the structural capacity to accommodate projected traffic
- -
City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan Update
~
32
'~
"
City Wide Land Use Plan
I from the proposed subdivision or the developer will pay to correct
I any structural deficiencies.
6) The traffic generated from a proposed subdivision shall not require
I City street improvements that are inconsistent with the Shakopee
Capital Improvement Plan. However, the City may, at its discretion,
consider developer-financed improvements to correct any street
I deficiencies.
7) The LOS requirements in paragraphs 1) to 4) above do not apply to
I the interchanges along Highway 169. At City discretion,
interchange impacts must be evaluated in conjunction with Scott
County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and a
I plan must be prepared to determine improvements needed to
resolve deficiencies. This plan must determine traffic generated by
the subdivision project, how this traffic contributes to the total traffic,
II and the time frame of the improvements. The plan must also
examine financing options, including project contribution and cost
sharing among other jurisdictions and other properties that
I contribute to traffic at the interchange.
d, Water Supply. A proposed subdivision shall be deemed to have an
I adequate water supply when:
1) The City water system has, adequate wells, storage, or pipe
I capacity to serve the subdivision.
2) The water utility extension is consistent with the Shakopee Water
II System Plan and offers the opportunity for water main looping to
serve the urban subdivision.
II 3) The extension of water mains will provide adequate water pressure
for personal use and fire protection.
II 4) Rural subdivisions can demonstrate that each of the proposed lots
can be provided with a potable water supply.
, e, Waste Disposal Systems. A proposed subdivision shall be served with
adequate waste disposal systems when:
-- 1 ) The urban sewered subdivision is located inside the City's MUSA.
I City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan Update
I 33
-
,
City Wide Land Use Plan -
2) The City has sufficient MUSA and pipe capacity to serve the till
subdivision if developed to its 'maximum density. II
3) The subdivision will result in a sewer extension consistent with the
Shakopee Sewer Plan and capital improvement plan. .
4) A rural subdivision can demonstrate that each lot can be served by
an adequate sanitary sewer disposal system. (I
f. Lack of Adequate Drainage. A condition of adequate drainage shall be
deemed to exist if: .
1) Surface or subsurface water retention and runoff are such that they
do not constitute a danger to the structural security of existing or I
"
proposed structures.
g. Environmental Protection. A proposed subdivision satisfies the City's II
environmental policies including:
I
1 ) Floodplain regulations. .
2) Shoreland regulations.
3) Wetland protection.
4) Recommendations of the Shakopee Natural Resource Plan .
5) Tree preservation policies.
II
INDUSTRIAL LAND USE
Shakopee has developed a strong industrial land use base. Located between Highway II
101 and the Highway 169 bypass, Shakopee's industrial parks provide excellent access
to regional highway infrastructure. Additionally, the industrial parks are served by the II
Union Pacific Railroad. The industrial area is physically separated from other less
il'}tense uses, allowing the industrial parks to operate in an unencumbered fashion. The
City has done an excellent job with regard to performance standards to ensure that the II
industrial buildings and grounds are attractive and well maintained.
The 2002 Supply and Absorption Analvsis of Commercial Land in Scott County II
prepared for the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority suggests that
vacancy rates currently reflect a soft market however; it is anticipated that the industrial
market will rebound in the next few years. The market study indicates that the City of II
Shakopee is nearing saturation for industrial land. The remaining industrial land supply
City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan Update II
34 II