STATE OF MINNESOTA
OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FOR THE MUNICIPAL
BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS UNIT
|
In Re Petition for Incorporation of Columbus Township
(I-68)
and
Petition by Forest
Lake to Annex Certain Portions of Columbus Township (A-7371)
|
FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS
AND ORDER
|
The above-entitled matter initially came on for hearing before Christine
M. Scotillo, Executive Director, Municipal Boundary Adjustments, on October 5,
2005, at Columbus
Town Hall, 16319 Kettle River Boulevard, Forest Lake, Minnesota
pursuant to In Re Petition for Incorporation of Columbus Township (I-68). The hearing was continued to allow for the
gathering of additional evidence.
Another hearing was held before Ms. Scotillo, on December 5, 2005, at Forest Lake City Hall, in the Council Chambers, 220 Lake Street North, Forest Lake, Minnesota
pursuant to Petition by Forest
Lake to Annex Certain
Portions of Columbus Township (A-7371).
The hearing was continued to allow for the gathering of additional evidence.
The matters were consolidated, and the hearing on both matters was
reconvened before Administrative Law Judge Beverly Jones Heydinger on Monday,
April 24, 2006, at Columbus
Town Hall, 16319 Kettle River Boulevard, Forest Lake, Minnesota. The hearing continued four subsequent days
and ended on April 28, 2006. Public
testimony was heard on the evening of April 25, 2006, at Columbus Town Hall;
about 60 people signed the Hearing Register, and 38 persons offered comments on
the record. At the conclusion of the hearing on
April 28, 2006, the parties and the Administrative Law Judge toured Columbus and Forest
Lake to view the area.
Following the hearing, the parties submitted written memoranda, reply
memoranda, and proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order. The transcript was received by all parties on
May 9, 2006. The final written reply
memorandum was received on May 30, 2006, and the record closed on that date.
John J. Steffenhagen, Esq., and William C. Griffith, Esq., of the firm of
Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren, Ltd., 1500 Wells
Fargo Plaza,
7900 Xerxes Avenue South,
Minneapolis, MN
55431-1194, appeared
representing Petitioner Columbus Township
(Columbus).
Christopher M. Hood, Esq., and Brandon M. Fitzsimmons, Esq., of the firm
Flaherty & Hood, P.A., 525
Park Street, Suite 470, St. Paul,
MN 55103,
appeared representing Petitioner City of Forest Lake (Forest Lake).
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
1.
Whether the Petition for Incorporation of
Columbus Township (I-68) be granted or denied based upon the factors set out in
Minn. Stat. § 414.02;
and
2.
Whether the Petition by Forest Lake to Annex
Certain Portions of Columbus Township (A-7371) be granted or denied based upon
the factors set out in Minn. Stat. § 414.031.
The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the Petition for
Incorporation of Columbus Township (I-68) should be granted. The Administrative Law Judge further
concludes that the Petition by Forest
Lake to Annex Certain
Portions of Columbus Township (A-7371) should be denied.
Based on the evidence in the hearing record, the Administrative Law Judge
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural
History of this Proceeding
On August 12, 2005, property owners in Columbus
filed a petition with the Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings -
Municipal Boundary Adjustments (“OAH-MBA”) requesting incorporation of all of
the Town of Columbus.
1.
Columbus is
located in Anoka County, Minnesota.
Its boundaries are legally described as:
Sections 25-36, Township 33 N, Range 22 W
Sections 1-36, Township 32 N, Range 22 W
2.
A small portion of land lies within East
Bethel’s boundaries and abuts Coon
Lake.
3.
On September 6, 2005, the Executive Director of
OAH-MBA set on for hearing on October 5, 2005, the Petition for Incorporation
of the Township (I-68) (the “Incorporation Petition”). Notice of the hearing was published in the Forest Lake Times.
4.
On September 27, 2005, Forest Lake
filed a Notice of Appearance with OAH-MBA to appear and participate in the
proceedings on the Incorporation Petition.
5.
The hearing on the Incorporation Petition was
opened on October 5, 2005, and continued to an indefinite date pending
completion of the agency review process and delegation for further evidentiary
hearing.
6.
On October 18, 2005, the Director referred the
Incorporation Petition to the Administrative Law Division of OAH.
7.
On October 26, 2005, Forest Lake
filed a resolution with OAH-MBA petitioning OAH-MBA to annex approximately 655
acres of unincorporated property located in Columbus (the “Annexation
Area”). The Annexation Area is described
as follows:
All that part of Sections 13, 24, 25, and
36 in the Township of Columbus, Anoka
County, Minnesota,
lying easterly of the right of way of Interstate Highway 35 E and Interstate
Highway 35.
8.
On November 9, 2005, the Executive Director of
OAH-MBA set on for hearing on December 5, 2005, the Petition by Forest Lake
to Annex Certain Portions of The Township (A-7371) (the “Annexation
Petition”). Notice of the hearing was
published in the Forest Lake Times.
9.
On November 10, 2005, the Director referred the
Annexation Petition to the Administrative Law Division of OAH.
10.
On November 10, 2005, the Chief Administrative
Law Judge ordered that the proceedings and hearing on the Incorporation
Petition and Annexation Petition be consolidated.
11.
On November 29, 2005, Forest Lake
filed an amended resolution with OAH-MBA amending the vote by which its City
Council adopted the Annexation Petition and incorporating by reference the
Annexation Petition.
12.
The Administrative Law Judge conducted
prehearing conferences with the parties on December 8, 2005, February 13, 2006,
and April 17, 2006.
13.
Columbus and Forest Lake
each published a Notice of Reconvened Hearing in the Forest Lake Times on April 6, 2006, and April 13, 2006.
14.
Columbus is
bordered by Ham Lake,
Linwood Township, Wyoming
Township, Forest Lake,
and Lino Lakes.
Forest Lake
is located in Washington
County. It is bordered by New
Scandia Township,
May Township,
Hugo, Lino Lakes,
Columbus, Wyoming
Township, and Chisago
Lake Township. Forest
Lake abuts the entire
eastern boundary of Annexation Area.
15.
The boundaries of Columbus are rectangular and have been in
place for nearly 150 years. The eastern
boundary also forms a portion of Anoka
County’s eastern
boundary.
16.
Both Columbus and
Forest Lake are part of the seven-county Twin
Cities Metropolitan Area. Columbus
became an “urban township” in 1963; Forest
Lake became a city in
1974.
17.
For the purposes of this proceeding, the “I-35
Corridor” is defined as approximately three square miles of land within Columbus on both the east
and west sides of Interstate Highway 35, within the existing Municipal Urban
Service Area (MUSA). The I-35 Corridor is approximately one mile wide and three
miles long. On the east side of I-35, it
includes the Annexation Area, and on the west side of I-35, it includes the
strip of land about one-half mile wide running between the freeway and the Rice
Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve.
The I-35 Corridor is located at the developing edge of the seven-county
metropolitan area in Anoka
County, and is
strategically located for growth and development just north of the intersection
of I-35E and I-35W.
18.
The property owners who filed the petition for
annexation are generally located in the northeast portion of the I-35 Corridor,
east of I-35, and next to the boundary with Forest Lake.
Factors
for Incorporation, Minn.
Stat. § 414.02, subd. 3, and Annexation, Minn.
Stat. § 414.031, subd. 4 (a).
Present
population and number of households, past population and projected population growth
of the subject area and adjacent units of local government.
Population
19.
The population of the seven-county Twin Cities
metropolitan area grew by over 850,000 people between 1970 and 2000. Most of this growth occurred outward from
free standing communities and along major transportation corridors such as
Interstate Highway 35 (I-35), Interstate Highway 94, and State Trunk Highways
169 and 61. Between 2000 and 2030,
population of the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area is projected to
grow by nearly 1 million people.
20.
Washington
County grew by about
55,000 people between 1990 and 2000. Anoka County
grew by over 54,000 during that same period.
Between 2000 and 2030, Anoka County’s population is projected to grow from 298,084
to 410,760 (38%), while Washington
County’s population is
projected to grow from 201,130 to 342,620 (70%).
21.
According to the United States Census Bureau,
six of the top 100 fastest growing counties in the United
States from 2000 to 2005 are located in and around the
Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, including Isanti
County (ranked 97th) and Chisago County (ranked 99th). Chisago and Isanti
Counties lie immediately north of Columbus and Forest
Lake.
22.
According to the records of the state
demographer, Columbus is the 13th most populous
of the 1,790 townships located in the State of Minnesota and the fourth most populous in
the metropolitan area. In 2000 its
population was greater than 709 of the 853 cities in the State of Minnesota.
23.
Between 1970 and 2000, Columbus’s
population grew by 1958 people (98%), and Forest Lake’s
population grew by 8,243 people (133%).
In 2004, the estimated population for Columbus was 4,120, exceeding the
Metropolitan Council’s 2010 forecast, with 44 people in the Annexation Area and
the same or fewer on the west side of I-35 Corridor. In 2004, Forest Lake’s
estimated population was 16,800.
Population Growth (1970-2004)
|
|
1970
|
1980
|
1990
|
2000
|
1970-2000
|
%
Change
1970-2000
|
2004
(est.)
|
|
Columbus Township
|
1,999
|
3,232
|
3,690
|
3,957
|
1,958
|
98%
|
4,120
|
|
Linwood Township
|
1,004
|
2,839
|
3,588
|
4,668
|
3,664
|
365%
|
|
|
Wyoming Township
|
1,262
|
2,313
|
2,967
|
4,379
|
3,117
|
247%
|
|
|
Ham Lake
|
3,327
|
7,832
|
8,924
|
12,710
|
9,383
|
282%
|
|
|
Lino Lakes
|
3,692
|
4,966
|
8,807
|
16,791
|
13,099
|
355%
|
|
|
Forest Lake*
|
6,197
|
9,927
|
12,523
|
14,440
|
8,243
|
133%
|
16,800
|
|
Hugo
|
2,669
|
3,771
|
4,417
|
6,363
|
3,694
|
138%
|
|
|
Anoka County
|
154,712
|
195,998
|
243,688
|
298,084
|
143,372
|
93%
|
|
|
Washington County
|
83,003
|
113,571
|
145,896
|
201,130
|
118,127
|
142%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twin Cities Metro
|
1,874,612
|
1,985,873
|
2,288,721
|
2,642,062
|
767,450
|
41%
|
|
*City and Township combined.
24.
Between 2000 and 2030, the Metropolitan Council
projects that Columbus’s
population will increase by 723 people (18%). Forest Lake
is projected to grow by 19,760 people (137%) during that same period.
Projected Population Growth (2000-2030)
|
|
2000
|
2010
|
2020
|
2030
|
Change
2000-2030
|
%
Change
2000-2030
|
|
Columbus Township
|
3,957
|
4,000
|
4,240
|
4,680
|
723
|
18%
|
|
Linwood Township
|
4,668
|
4,920
|
5,000
|
5,400
|
732
|
16%
|
|
Wyoming Township
|
4,379
|
5,252
|
6,320
|
7,265
|
2,886
|
66%
|
|
Ham Lake
|
12,710
|
15,200
|
15,200
|
15,200
|
2,490
|
20%
|
|
Lino Lakes
|
16,791
|
22,500
|
26,300
|
30,700
|
13,909
|
83%
|
|
Forest Lake
|
14,440
|
21,700
|
27,800
|
34,200
|
19,760
|
137%
|
|
Hugo
|
6,363
|
19,100
|
29,000
|
40,000
|
33,637
|
529%
|
|
Anoka County
|
298,084
|
355,170
|
393,010
|
410,760
|
112,676
|
37%
|
|
Washington County
|
201,130
|
244,732
|
296,693
|
342,620
|
141,490
|
70%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twin Cities Metro
|
2,642,062
|
3,028,102
|
3,376,723
|
3,608,000
|
3,608,000
|
36%
|
25.
In its September 2005 system statement, the
Metropolitan Council revised Forest Lake’s projected population, household,
sewered development, and wastewater flow projections because of the City’s
increased rate of growth and plans to increase orderly development.
26.
Forest Lake is projected to grow much faster
than Columbus, largely because of the natural conditions in Columbus that
inhibit development, and the differences in the Comprehensive Plan for each of
them, as reflected in the Metropolitan Council’s designation of Forest Lake as
a Rural Developing Community and Columbus as a Diversified Rural Community.
Households
27.
The Metropolitan Council projects that more than
470,000 households will be added within the seven-county Metropolitan Area
between 2000 and 2030.
28.
Anoka and Washington Counties accounted for nearly 30% of the
building permits issued in the metropolitan area for 2004. The Metropolitan Council projects that
between 2000 and 2030, the number of households in Anoka County is projected to
grow from 106,428 to 163,610 (about 54%), while the number of households in
Washington County is projected to grow from 71,462 to 138,117 (about 93%).
29.
From 1990 to 2000, the number of households in Columbus grew by 199
(18%). During the same time, Forest Lake’s
number of households grew by 1,009 (23%).
Between 2001 and 2005, 89 new homes were built in Columbus
and 1,491 new residential units were built in Forest Lake. In 2004, there were an estimated 1,388
households in Columbus and 6,526 households in Forest Lake.
30.
Between 2000 and 2030, Columbus
is projected to add 422 more homes (32%), and Forest Lake
is projected to add 8,267 more homes (152%). The Metropolitan Council indicates
that the projected household growth for Columbus’s
“Developing” area along the I-35 corridor, which includes the Annexation Area,
will occur at urban densities.
Household
Growth (1990-2000)
|
|
1990
|
2000
|
Change 1990-2000
|
%
Change 1990-2000
|
|
Columbus Township
|
1,129
|
1,328
|
199
|
18%
|
|
Linwood Township
|
1,146
|
1,578
|
432
|
38%
|
|
Wyoming Township
|
934
|
1,438
|
504
|
54%
|
|
Ham Lake
|
2,720
|
4,139
|
1,419
|
52%
|
|
Lino Lakes
|
2,603
|
4,857
|
2,254
|
87%
|
|
Forest Lake*
|
4,424
|
5,433
|
1,009
|
23%
|
|
Hugo
|
1,416
|
2,125
|
709
|
50%
|
|
Anoka County
|
82,437
|
106,428
|
23,991
|
|
|
Twin Cities Metro
|
875,504
|
1,021,456
|
145,952
|
|
*
City and Township combined.
Projected Household Growth
(2000-2030)
|
|
2000
|
2010
|
2020
|
2030
|
Change
2000-2030
|
%
Change
2000-2030
|
|
Columbus Township
|
1,328
|
1,450
|
1,600
|
1,750
|
422
|
32%
|
|
Linwood Township
|
1,578
|
1,820
|
1,950
|
2,090
|
512
|
32%
|
|
Wyoming Township
|
1,438
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
Ham Lake
|
4,139
|
5,100
|
5,300
|
5,500
|
1,361
|
33%
|
|
Lino Lakes
|
4,857
|
7,100
|
8,600
|
10,100
|
5,243
|
108%
|
|
Forest Lake
|
5,433
|
8,500
|
11,100
|
13,700
|
8,267
|
152%
|
|
Hugo
|
2,125
|
7,200
|
11,100
|
15,600
|
13,475
|
634%
|
|
Anoka County
|
106,428
|
134,980
|
154,880
|
163,830
|
57,402
|
54%
|
|
Washington County
|
71,462
|
93,949
|
116,834
|
138,117
|
66,655
|
93%
|
|
Twin Cities Metro
|
1,021,456
|
1,213,800
|
1,386,200
|
1,513,100
|
491,644
|
48%
|
31.
The I-35 Corridor, along with areas south and
east of County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 23 (Lake Drive) in Columbus, is located
in Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 18 as designated by state and local
transportation officials. As of 2000,
there were 306 jobs available in TAZ 18.
By 2030, there are expected to be 650 jobs available in TAZ 18, over a
112% increase in available jobs. The
remainder of Columbus
is predicted to have an increase in jobs of 174 by 2030. Forest
Lake is predicted to have
an increase of 4,041 jobs between 2000 and 2030.
Classification by the Metropolitan Council
32.
Columbus
is classified by the Metropolitan Council as a Diversified Rural Community,
with characteristics of a Developing Community.
In general, Diversified Rural Communities have large-lot residential
development, development of parks, open spaces, green corridor connections, and
limited development that serves the region.
The Metropolitan Council would anticipate Columbus, as a Developing Community, to
develop along the I-35 Corridor. The area in Columbus west of the I-35 Corridor is
designated by the Metropolitan Council as “Permanent Rural.”
33.
Sixteen cities within the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area are, like Columbus,
designed as diversified rural by the Metropolitan Council. Examples include East Bethel, Oak Grove, Greenfield, Independence,
Afton, Dellwood and Lakeland.
Columbus’s 2000
population is greater than ten of those cities. An additional 13 cities within the Twin
Cities Metropolitan Area are classified dually, diversified rural and urban or
partially urban.
34.
The Columbus Comprehensive Plan was approved by
the Metropolitan Council in 1999, including the development of the I-35
Corridor for commercial/industrial use.
The Plan was approved, along with designation of the I-35 Corridor as
part of the 2010 MUSA, eligible for regional sewer service. Columbus
is expected to submit a comprehensive plan update by 2008.
35.
Forest
Lake is classified by the
Metropolitan Council as a Developing Community, with some area designated as
Diversified Rural for development after 2030.
36.
The Forest Lake Comprehensive Plan was reviewed
initially in March 2000. Following annexation
of Forest Lake Township
in 2000, a combined Comprehensive Plan was submitted in May 2004. The accompanying map showed existing land
use, with the area adjacent to and east of the proposed Annexation Area as
either “conservancy,” with a density of 1 dwelling per 20 acres or “rural
residential,” with a density of 1 dwelling per 5 acres. Forest
Lake’s 2004 Comprehensive Plan and
2005 Amendment do not address either portion of the I-35 Corridor, or
anticipate extension of urban services to the adjoining portions of Forest Lake. The Metropolitan Council anticipates that Forest Lake
will submit a new plan by 2008. The area in Forest Lake
immediately to the east of the northern half of the I-35 Corridor is largely
“Permanent Rural,” with a small area of established development. East of the southern half of the I-35
Corridor is designated as part of the “Urban Reserve,” for development after
2040.
37.
At the present time, development is beginning in
the I-35 Corridor. There is little
development immediately to the west of the I-35 Corridor in Columbus,
in part because of the intervening Rice Creek Chain of Lakes, a protected area,
and, similarly, little development immediately east of the Corridor because of
an intervening wetland on the western boundary of Forest Lake.
38.
The map of the MUSA staging areas reflects that
much of the surrounding area, including large portions of Columbus
and eastern Forest
Lake, will remain
Permanent Rural through 2040 and beyond, in part because of its natural
environment and also to preserve areas for future growth.
39.
Forty-seven townships remain in the seven county
metropolitan area. Three townships
remain in Anoka County:
Columbus, Burns and Linwood. Columbus has the fourth
largest population of townships in the metropolitan area. Only three metropolitan area townships
reported more total expenditures in 2004.
40.
As a result of the development throughout the
surrounding area, including Forest Lake, Columbus
is suburban in character, and the I-35 Corridor is in the process of developing
for urban commercial/industrial use.
Development of sewer and water in an orderly manner is required to
assure the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding area.
Quantity
of land within the subject area; the natural terrain including recognizable
physical features, general topography, major watersheds, soil conditions and
such natural features as rivers, lakes and major bluffs.
41.
Columbus
contains 31,000 acres, 48 sections of land. The natural terrain in Columbus is generally flat to rolling and
predominant natural features include wetlands and surface waters, interspersed
with upland wooded areas. About
two-thirds of the land in Columbus
(over 20,000 acres) is covered with wetlands, lakes and adjacent floodplain
areas. Little of this land is likely to
be developed. The remaining land in
Columbus, about one-third of the area, is suitable for commercial,
institutional, residential, and agricultural land uses.
42.
The Carlos Avery Wildlife Management Area is
approximately 23,000 acres; 9,733 acres are in Columbus.
It is the largest natural recreational area in the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area and offers bird watching, wildlife viewing, hiking,
cross-country skiing, snow shoeing, fishing, and hunting. As population densities increase in the
surrounding area, the fragility and importance of the area as a natural
resource also increase. The Metropolitan
Council intends to work with Columbus and Anoka County
to conserve, protect and enhance this area.
43.
Columbus
has worked closely with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for
several decades to manage and protect the natural resources of the community,
including portions of the Carlos Avery Wildlife Management Area, Lamprey Pass
Wildlife Management Area, the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve,
and the Houle Wildlife Management Area. Some of the significant natural resource
areas are outside of the presently protected areas but adjacent to them. Crossways
Lake, Howard
Lake, Little Coon Lake and portions of
Higgins Lake,
Mud Lake,
Coon Lake
and Rondeau Lake
are located in Columbus.
44.
There are three watersheds in Columbus: Rice Creek, Sunrise River
and Coon Creek. Very wet organic soils,
fine sand and little upland occupy much of the western half of Columbus.
Most of the existing residential development is located in the eastern
half of Columbus
and has sandy, well-drained soils, and some forested areas and wetlands. The soils in the I-35 Corridor range from
well-drained sandy soils to poorly-drained loamy soils, generally surrounded by
larger wetlands.
45.
Forest
Lake has 22,711 acres,
including 3,000 acres of wetlands, lakes and floodplain.
46.
There is a portion of the Lamprey Pass Wildlife
Management Area on the west side of Forest
Lake and the Hardwood
Creek Wildlife Management Area in the southeast. The predominant physical feature is Forest Lake
(2,250 acres), and nearby Sylvan
Lake. Clear Lake
and a portion of Mud Lake are located on the western side of the city,
near the Columbus
border.
47.
There are six soil types in Forest Lake. Much of the soil is wet on a high water table
or percolates slowly. Forest Lake
lies within two watersheds, Forest
Lake and Rice Creek. Part of the city, particularly near the lakes
and Hardwood Creek, is within the 100-year floodplain.
Present
pattern of physical development, planning, and intended land uses in the
subject area including residential, industrial, commercial, agricultural, and
institutional land uses and the impact of the proposed action on those uses.
48.
The current land use designations in the I-35
Corridor and the adjoining area of Forest
Lake are shown in Exhibit
1 at 37, Figure 11. The figure shows the
portions of the I-35 Corridor in Columbus
designated for commercial/industrial development and the adjacent
wetlands. It also shows Forest Lake’s
plans for development to the east of its border with Columbus.
49.
Approximately 37 percent of the acreage within Columbus is publicly owned, largely as parks and state
wildlife management areas, including the Carlos Avery Wildlife Management Area
which occupies 31% of Columbus. Approximately another third is wetlands,
lakes and adjacent floodplain.
50.
About 8,580 acres, 28%, of Columbus is developable. Although scattered throughout the township, the
developable acres are predominantly located through the central area, along CSAH
23 (Lake Drive),
Kettle River Boulevard,
and in the I-35 Corridor. Development is limited by the natural
terrain. The historical development pattern occurred in the central third of Columbus, and most
residential development exists in this area, along three major roads, Lake Drive, Kettle River Boulevard
and CSAH 18. These residences are served
by private sewage systems, and residential development is limited to five
acres.
51.
Because of its natural limitations and the
necessity of preserving the natural resources, land in Columbus outside of the I-35 Corridor is not
expected to be developed at urban levels.
The Metropolitan Council does not anticipate that sewer service will be
installed outside of the corridor, and has classified the rest of the township
as permanent rural. Neither Columbus
nor Forest Lake
anticipate that the portions of Columbus
outside of the I-35 Corridor, and outside of the current MUSA line, will be
developed at urban services in the foreseeable future.
52.
Commercial and light industrial land uses have
developed in Columbus along Lake Drive north of the border with Lino Lakes,
running through the center, upland corridor of Columbus.
The corridor along Lake
Drive ranges in width from about one-half mile to
less than one-quarter mile. There are about 200 acres of land available
for commercial and light industrial development within that corridor. Businesses along Lake Drive include several that require
extensive storage for products, materials or equipment, with relatively few
employees. Such businesses do not
typically require or request sewer or water service.
53.
During the mid to late 1990’s, the Columbus
Comprehensive Plan was updated to meet the Metropolitan Council’s mandatory
planning requirements, and it conforms with the Council’s Regional Blueprint
and Regional Growth Strategy.
54.
Columbus’s
Comprehensive Plan established the I-35 Corridor as a public utility district,
and obtained designation of the area as part of the Municipal Urban Service
Area (MUSA). MUSA designation allowed Columbus to develop
sanitary sewer access to the I-35 Corridor and to pursue an urban level of development
within the corridor. Columbus
is one of only three townships within the MUSA to operate public utilities.
55.
During the development of Columbus’s
Comprehensive Plan and thereafter, Columbus spent several years developing
detailed engineering plans to stage the installation of municipal utilities and
a detailed land use plan, including zoning classifications and regulations, to
manage growth at urban levels within the I-35 Corridor.
56.
The I-35 Corridor contains approximately 800
acres that can be developed at urban densities.
Barely half of that land is vacant and available for immediate
development; about half of the developable acres are located in the Annexation
Area. There are approximately 28 single-family
homes or farmsteads in the I-35 Corridor, about equally divided between the two
sides of the interstate.
57.
Development is spreading up I-35 into the area
of Columbus and Forest Lake
as population grows in the area.
Development at an urban level of service is consistent with orderly and
contiguous development because of the exposure and transportation access
provided by the interstate highway and the existing interstate highway
interchange at CSAH 23. Because of its proximity to an existing
interstate exchange, the I-35 Corridor is well-suited to commercial and
industrial development. It is only a
mile in width, bisected by the interstate.
Noise generated by the interstate makes the area unattractive for
residential development.
58.
Since 2000, several major developments have
occurred in the I-35 Corridor. On the
west side, Gander Mountain developed a 100,000 square foot outdoor recreation
retail facility, the necessary approval has been given and development begun
for a harness track on approximately 160 acres, Coates Trailer Sales developed
a site for retail sales and repair of recreational vehicles and trailers, and
Crystal-Pierz Marine acquired a site to sell boats and equipment. On the east side, Ziegler Caterpillar, LLC,
has acquired an 80-acre site to construct a major facility for the sales,
rental and repair of construction equipment, to be constructed in 2006, and
Forest Lake Arctic Cat and Trailerland operate commercial sales and repair
businesses.
59.
The oldest part of the City of Forest Lake
includes a commercial business district and residential neighborhoods along the
lakeshore and near the original downtown.
Commercial development is concentrated along Highway 61 (Lake Street) north from
Trunk Highway 97 (Scandia Trail) to just north of Broadway Avenue, and east of the
intersection of Highway 61 and Highway 8.
Commercial development is also concentrated around the I-35 interchange
with Broadway. The commercial land use
near I-35 includes auto dealerships and large retail stores. Light industrial use has developed along I-35
south of the Broadway interchange.
60.
The northwestern portion of Forest Lake
is developing rapidly, and future growth is likely to extend toward the Columbus border north of
the I-35 Corridor, along Trunk Highway 2. Because of its rapid growth, the Metropolitan
Council considers Forest
Lake to be a freestanding
growth area which is expected to grow outward, particularly toward the south,
in an orderly fashion.
61.
Although there are areas of dense development,
much of Forest Lake is still undeveloped or at low densities. Agriculture and wetlands dominate the
southern half of Forest
Lake, and the
northeastern portion. Scattered
throughout the agricultural area is low-density, residential development served
by individual sewage treatment systems.
In its 2004 Comprehensive Plan, Forest Lake
reported that 59% of its land was classified as agricultural or vacant.
62.
A thin band of wetlands separates the northern
portion of the I-35 Corridor from residential development in Forest Lake. It includes the 78-acre Houle Wildlife
Management Area, and a portion of the Lamprey Pass Wildlife Management Area
which extends into the I-35 Corridor. Forest Lake
has designated this land along the northern two thirds of the Annexation Area
as “conservancy,” with no scheduled development
because of its environmental sensitivity.
A portion of the land to the east of the northern half of the I-35
Corridor is included in the existing MUSA or 2020 MUSA.
63.
Approximately 10,450 acres, or 46%, of Forest Lake
is developable with large contiguous areas in the southwest quadrant reserved
for development as part of the 2040 Urban Reserve. Most of this land was part of Forest Lake
Township prior to its
annexation in 2000 into the City of Forest Lake.
64.
Since 2000, development has extended towards the
south and west of the original city.
Planning is underway for a large new development, Headwaters, in the
former township, adjacent to Highway 61 and extending west toward Columbus.
65.
Forest Lake has worked with Washington County
to develop a master plan for growth in the southwestern portion. The Southwest Development Area Alternative
Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) was completed in September 2005, the City Council
approved an amendment to Forest
Lake’s Comprehensive Plan
on February 6, 2006, and that amendment is subject to the review and approval
of the Metropolitan Council. The western
edge of the area included in the Comprehensive Plan amendment abuts a small
section of the I-35 Corridor. However, that
area is planned for parks and recreation, and not for residential, commercial
or industrial development. The effect of
the plan is to reallocate the areas designated for parks and recreation and
relocate the area designated as public/industrial. It does not appear to altar the timing of
development south of the midpoint between 200th Street North and 190th Street North. The plan amendment does not extend utilities
into the area adjoining the southern portion of the I-35 Corridor.
66.
The Southwest Development Area AUAR states: “Planned commercial/industrial development in
Columbus Township would be adjacent to
conservancy and park areas in the development scenarios. These open space and recreational areas will
provide a buffer from the commercial/industrial development in Columbus Township to planned residential areas in
the AUAR area.”
67.
In its 2004 Comprehensive Plan, Forest Lake
compared land use trends from 2000 to 2020, and projected that in 2020 it would
have an increase from 5.8% to 16.1% in Rural Residential Land, a decrease from
59% to 12.6% in Agriculture/Vacant, an increase in Urban Residential (including
Multiple Family and Mobile Home) from 9.3% to 21.3%, and an increase in the
Commercial/Industrial land use from 2.4% to 7.4%. Forest
Lake also projected that
the increased Conservancy land and most of the 2,786 acres designated for
Future Urban Residential would remain agriculture/open space until 2020 and
beyond.
68.
In 2005, Forest Lake
amended its Sewer Policy Plan, revising the acres to be served and projected
flowage. However, this amendment did not
project utility staging into the area immediately adjacent to the I-35
Corridor.
69.
Forest
Lake will submit an
amendment to its Comprehensive Plan in 2008, requesting an extension of the
MUSA line south of 190th
Street, but leaving the southern portion of the
City that adjoins the Annexation Area part of the 2040 urban reserve.
The
present transportation network and potential transportation issues, including
proposed highway development.
70.
CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) runs through the center of Columbus to the I-35 interchange and becomes Trunk Highway
(TH) 97 going east into Forest
Lake. CSAH 23 also connects with County Road 62 (Kettle River Boulevard),
which runs north to connect with CSAH 18, which in turn becomes CSAH 2 (Broadway Avenue). Broadway
Avenue intersects with I-35 and is heavily
developed as it runs east into the downtown area of Forest Lake. CSAH 19 also connects CSAH 23 and CSAH 18 in
the center of Columbus. CSAH 21 (West Freeway Drive) serves as a frontage
road along the west side of I-35 within the I-35 Corridor. The I-35 interchange
with CSAH 23 and TH 97 is at the northern border of the I-35 Corridor. I-35W and I-35E merge within the Corridor,
but there is no interchange at that point.
Because of extensive public waters and wetlands, it is unlikely that
major new roadway corridors will be developed in Columbus.
71.
At the present time, the east side of the I-35
Corridor is served by Hornsby Street which connects at the north with TH 97 and
serves as frontage road for the northern part of the eastern portion of the
corridor, south to 145th Avenue.
72.
I-35 is classified as a principal arterial. Five county roads serve Columbus.
Three are classified as minor arterials (CSAH 19, CSAH 18, CSAH 23) and
two are classified as county collectors (County Road 62 and CSAH 21).
73.
For several years, Columbus staff has fully participated in area
highway corridor studies, including analysis of current highway use, future
development and potential improvements. In particular, Columbus staff has participated in discussion
of improvements to the I-35 interchange and frontage roads, including the CSAH
21 intersection with CSAH 23 west of the I-35 interchange,
relocation of the current park-and-ride facility, and the redesign of the Hornsby Street
intersection with TH 97, just east of the I-35 interchange. Staff has also worked with other cities to
review CSAH 14 and the minor arterial network to reduce pressure on the
interstate system, and to plan improvements to I-35 between I-694 and Hinckley. Columbus
has retained a professional planner and engineer to assist with its
transportation planning,
and assembled updated traffic information to develop the Harness Race Track
Environmental Assessment Worksheet.
74.
Two principal arterial roads serving Forest Lake
are I-35 and U.S. Highway 8. Minor
arterial roads include U.S. Highway 61 and TH 97. Highway 61 runs parallel to I-35, and TH 97
and U.S. Highway 8 run east and west, intersecting with both Highway 61 and
I-35. Other minor arterials include
CSAH 2 (West Broadway), County Highway 83 (SW 11th Avenue) from I-35 to
U.S. Highway 61, CSAH 34 (SE 11th
Avenue), and three additional segments. In its 2004 Comprehensive Plan, Forest Lake
did not project development of any additional minor arterial roads.
75.
Columbus and Forest Lake participated with Anoka
County, Washington County, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT),
Metropolitan Council and the Town of Scandia to develop a detailed plan for
improvements to TH 97 and portions of parallel east-west roadways. Columbus
is working with MnDOT to redesign the Hornsby
Street intersection with Trunk Highway 97, near
the east I-35 interchange ramps.
76.
Forest
Lake and MnDOT own an
airport with a single 2,725-foot turf runway.
At the present time, take-offs and landings are visual, and there are no
runway lights. Forest
Lake has plans to improve the airport
and the adjoining area, but it is not currently designated as one of the
“reliever airports” to the Minneapolis-St.
Paul International
Airport.
Land use
controls and planning presently being utilized in the subject area, including
comprehensive plans, policies of the Metropolitan Council; and whether there
are inconsistencies between proposed development and existing land controls.
77.
Both Columbus and
Forest Lake have Comprehensive Plans, submitted
to and approved by the Metropolitan Council. Both intend to submit revised plans by 2008.
78.
In 1963, seven townships in Anoka County,
including Columbus,
began to exercise urban town powers pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 368.01. Among those powers are the ability to
establish and maintain sewers and waterworks, the power of eminent domain, and
ability to establish a fire department.
Four of the seven townships have subsequently incorporated into cities.
79.
Anoka County controls shoreland floodplain areas; Columbus is responsible
for platting, building permits and inspections, conditional use permits,
interim use permits and administrative services. Incorporation would eliminate some overlap
with the services provided by Anoka
County. In the past five years, Columbus has updated its Zoning and
Subdivision Regulations.
80.
The current Columbus Comprehensive Plan was
effective in 1999 and included the establishment of a public utility district
within the I-35 Corridor, with MUSA designation. Columbus
entered into a Joint Powers Agreement with what was at that time the Town of
Forest Lake to allow sanitary sewer access from Columbus through the Town of Forest Lake to
the Metropolitan Interceptor.
Thereafter, Columbus
developed engineering plans to establish and stage municipal utilities, a
detailed land use plan and zoning classifications and regulations to allow
urban level of development within the I-35 Corridor. The new zoning regulations allow existing
businesses to be expanded or modified and access public utilities as the
utilities become available. Columbus
also has an ordinance governing its sewer and water service.
81.
Forest
Lake has zoning
ordinances that address six types of residential districts. It updated its subdivision ordinances in
2000, and is attempting to develop one subdivision ordinance, combining the
City’s ordinance with the ordinance enacted by the Township of Forest Lake,
prior to its annexation. Because of its higher level of development, Forest Lake
has more types of ordinances that could be applied within the I-35
Corridor. However, Columbus has Light Industrial, Commercial
Retail and Commercial/Showroom zoning regulations in place that can be applied
within the I-35 Corridor, with the small portion in the Corridor that is within
the Lamprey Pass Wildlife Management Area zoned for Rural Residential.
82.
Columbus
has conducted its affairs in a manner similar to a city for several years and
has a professional staff familiar with and competent to administer city
functions.
83.
Columbus
has developed its plans and development controls with the specific purpose of
managing development in the I-35 Corridor.
Development of the corridor is consistent with its plans. Forest
Lake has the necessary
zoning and development tools to handle development in the I-35 Corridor, but it
has not included development of that area in its planning prior to receiving
the Annexation Petition from a group of landowners.
Existing
levels of governmental services being provided to the subject area, including
water and sewer service, fire rating and protection, law enforcement, street
improvements and maintenance, administrative services, and recreational
facilities and the impact of the proposed action on the delivery of the services.
Sewer and Water
84.
Because of its terrain and sparse level of
development, all of Columbus
outside of the I-35 Corridor is served by Individual Sewage Treatment Systems
(ISTS), and will be for the foreseeable future.
Columbus
has adopted the rules promulgated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
that govern ISTS, and has supplemented the rules with additional requirements.
85.
Columbus
employs a full-time building official who is certified to inspect and review
the design of septic systems and to inspect plumbing connections to the
municipal sewer and water system.
86.
In about 1996, in preparation for submission of
its Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council, Columbus began to research and plan for
development of the I-35 Corridor.
87.
In 1999, the Metropolitan Council approved sewer
service in the I-35 Corridor, as part of its approval of the Columbus
Comprehensive Plan, conditioned upon entering into a Joint Powers Agreement
with the Town of Forest Lake (now part of the City of Forest Lake) to connect to
the interceptor sewer located one and one-quarter mile east of the
Columbus/Forest Lake boundary. A Joint
Powers Agreement was signed in 2000.
88.
Columbus
retained engineers and developed proposals to stage installation of sewer
infrastructure in the I-35 Corridor; both sides of the corridor were planned as
one unit. In the past five years, Columbus has invested heavily in the design
and early phases of construction of a sewer and water system for the I-35
Corridor. Its Board of Supervisors
conducted public hearings and hired experts
to evaluate the feasibility, financing and implementation of public utilities
in that portion of the township.
89.
Columbus
received the “Final Report: Sewer Cost
Feasibility Study for Sanitary Sewer Service Within the I-35 Corridor” in July
2000.
90.
Columbus and Forest Lake
cooperated on two projects. The first
project was completed in 2000 and extended a shared-use gravity sanitary sewer
from the interceptor to Fenway
Avenue. The
second project extended a separate forcemain in 202nd Street from Fenway Avenue to Enfield Avenue. Both of these projects are within Forest Lake.
91.
In 2004, Columbus
began the last portion of the sewer project needed to serve the I-35
Corridor. A main pumping station was
installed in Columbus on Hornsby Street on the east side of the
I-35 Corridor and along a forcemain to the intersection of Enfield Avenue and 202nd Street in Forest Lake. The pumping station and forcemain will
collect and pump 100% of the sewage generated in the I-35 Corridor to the metropolitan
interceptor. This system became fully
operational in 2005 at a cost of $1,315,475, assessed proportionally across all
buildable property in the I-35 Corridor.
92.
Upon request, properties on the west side of the
I-35 Corridor have been connected to the sanitary sewer system via pipes
extended west from the main pump station, under I-35, and south along Freeway
Drive, and assessed proportionally for the extensions and connection. Exhibit 88 depicts the existing sewer system
and proposed extensions within the I-35 Corridor. At the present time, none of the property
owners in the Annexation Area have requested hook-up to the sewer. Columbus
anticipates that sewer service will be expanded throughout the I-35 Corridor in
stages, through 2015.
93.
Forest
Lake conceded that the
sewer infrastructure in the I-35 Corridor is adequate, and that it would maintain
it if annexation were granted.
94.
Columbus
assessed the trunk sewer cost at $1,556 per buildable acre and the costs for
direct connection in the southwest portion of the I-35 Corridor were assessed
at $5,462 per buildable acre.
95.
Columbus
has a public works supervisor who holds a Class D wastewater license to operate
the system of gravity sewers and pumping station. He is working on his Class C operator’s
license, and other public works staff are also being trained to obtain
necessary licensure.
96.
At the present time, all of Columbus is served by individual water
wells. Properties outside of the I-35
Corridor will continue to rely on individual wells in the future.
97.
In 2001, Columbus
asked Forest Lake to participate in discussion about
the development of a municipal water system, as contemplated by the joint
powers agreement. Forest Lake
acknowledged the request but did not pursue discussion. Its engineers reviewed Forest
Lake’s capacity to provide water
service and concluded that the city would need to construct a new water
treatment plant to provide service to Columbus
at that time, which the city did not choose to do.
98.
In 2003, Columbus
approached Forest Lake about providing temporary water service to the
west side of the I-35 Corridor while Columbus
studied development of a water system, but Forest
Lake denied Columbus’s request because it did not want to
supply water on a short-term basis. At that point, Columbus retained an engineering firm to
conduct a water feasibility study, which was completed in September 2003.
99.
The water system was designed to serve both
sides of the I-35 Corridor, with two interconnected loops.
100. Columbus conducted public
hearings concerning the establishment of a municipal water system in January
2004,
and then started the process of locating a site for and constructing a test
well. On June 23, 2004, Columbus received a petition from property
owners along West Freeway Drive
for full water service. The Town Board
ordered an engineering report and held another public hearing. Because of the apparent strong public
support, Columbus
moved ahead with plans to install a municipal well and pumphouse.
101. Prior
to incurring the cost for the land purchase and construction of the well, Columbus contacted Forest Lake
again to discuss the possibility of operating a joint water supply. However, on October 14, 2005, Forest Lake
declined to pursue joint development because the Columbus incorporation petition was pending. Columbus
moved forward with its plan to purchase land and contract for a well.
102. The
costs of the initial land purchase, well and pumphouse system, which is estimated
to be $1,067,500, will be assessed proportionally across all buildable property
in the I-35 Corridor, in the same manner as the sanitary sewer assessment. Additional wells, elevated tanks and a
treatment tank will be built as the I-35 Corridor develops, at an estimated cost
of $4,385,00, to be assessed as a connection charge payable as new users
connect. Similarly, watermains that
provide direct service to the property will be installed as petitioned, and
assessed to the benefiting properties at a cost of $4,381 per buildable
acre. The total charges for installed
service are $11,021 per buildable acre.
103. At
the time of the hearing, the first water well was under construction and
negotiations were underway for acquisition of property to install a second well
and additional facilities, and approximately one and one quarter miles of
watermain had been installed. The water system is expected to become
operational by the end of 2006. Columbus will contract
with a licensed water system operator until the public works supervisor obtains
the necessary water operator’s license. Although Forest
Lake’s expert questioned the water
well location, he did not believe that the Columbus water system presented any public
health, safety or welfare issues.
104. Columbus has completed a
Comprehensive Water Management Plan and has contracted with the Rice Creek
Watershed District to prepare the Comprehensive Wetland portion of its Surface
Water Plan. It is estimated that the
Watershed District will complete the Wetland portion in 2006, and that Columbus will complete
the Surface Water Plan thereafter. Columbus has allocated
$19,000 to begin wetland monitoring.
Development in Columbus
is subject to review by the respective watershed district.
105. Forest Lake
has a developed water system that serves most of its residential neighborhoods.
About 80 percent of Forest
Lake residents have sewer
service and 60 to 70 percent are connected to its water system. Forest
Lake’s municipal water
infrastructure comes within 1200 feet of the Annexation Area near its north
end.
106. Forest Lake’s
2004 Comprehensive Plan included utility staging. At that time, Forest
Lake projected that utilities would be
extended to an area extending south from 200th Street North about
halfway to 190th Street
North, toward Forest Lake’s
western border, but stopping at the wetland to the east of the I-35
Corridor. It included no plan to extend
utilities to the Columbus
border or to the I-35 Corridor. The Southwest Area AUAR is consistent with
this plan.
107. Although
Forest Lake
recently amended its Comprehensive Plan, it did not propose to deliver water to
the Annexation Area or the western portion of the I-35 Corridor, or to bring
its utilities up to a point where the utilities could connect to the Columbus utilities. The Forest Lake City Council did not receive
engineering reports concerning delivery of water to the Annexation Area prior
to its vote to pursue annexation.
108. For
the purposes of this proceeding, Forest
Lake contracted for an
engineering report that included a plan to provide water and sewer service to
the Annexation Area, but did not include a plan for providing water and sewer
service to the western portion of the I-35 Corridor. Forest
Lake would extend sewer service to the
northern end of the Annexation Area as development occurs, connecting to the
existing infrastructure installed by Columbus.
Forest Lake
foresees future development that could extend to the southern portion of the
Annexation Area from the east. At two
points, the proposed extensions would stop at the east side of the Annexation
Area because of the presence of wetlands.
The two southernmost extensions toward the Annexation Area would appear
to be years away since the proposed trunk sewers would cross land for which
there are no development plans.
109. The
proposed lines south of 145th
Avenue NE cannot be constructed until Forest Lake
obtains an approved amendment to its Comprehensive Plan from the Metropolitan
Council. In order to reach the I-35
Corridor at this time, the amended plan would require “leap-frogging” over an
area that is not currently planned for development and not currently within the
MUSA.
110. Forest Lake
relies on area charges to properties as they develop to cover its investment in
infrastructure. In Columbus more of the area-wide charges are
assessed when the infrastructure is developed, regardless of when the property
is connected. Additional charges are
tied to connection.
111. For
the purpose of this proceeding, Forest
Lake has proposed an
extension of its water system to serve the Annexation Area, extending along TH
97 and south down Hornsby Street. It has no plan to serve the western portion
of the I-35 Corridor.
112. The
parties disputed the relative costs per buildable acre in Columbus
and Forest Lake for sewer and water, in part
because the method of assessing and assigning the costs differ. Initially some of the property owners who
petitioned for annexation to Forest Lake were mistaken about the costs of obtaining water
from Forest Lake.
They later learned of the error but most of them continued to seek
annexation, in part because they preferred Forest Lake’s
method of allocating the water development costs.
Fire Rating and Protection
113. Fire
protection in Columbus and Forest
Lake and a portion of Wyoming Township is provided under the terms of
a Fire Protection Agreement, entered into by those three governmental units,
and operated by the “Forest Lake Area Joint Fire Board,” with representation
from the three communities. There are two fire stations – one in Columbus and
one in Forest Lake.
Forest Lake is responsible for the daily
administration and management of the Fire Department’s approved budget, but
ownership of equipment and allocation of costs is proportional to the
members. The allocation is determined by
the market valuation that the property of each member bears to the total market
valuation of all three. Neither Columbus
nor Forest Lake anticipates that incorporation or
annexation would affect the terms of the Fire Protection Agreement.
114. At
the present time, the Insurance Service Organization (ISO) fire rating in Columbus and in the portions of Forest Lake
not served by municipal fire hydrants is 7 or 10, depending on the distance of
the property from the nearest fire station.
The fire rating in Forest
Lake for areas served by
municipal fire hydrants is 5. It is
anticipated that the fire rating in the I-35 Corridor will improve once a
municipal water system is installed, whether operated by Forest
Lake or Columbus.
The ISO rating is used for insurance underwriting and to calculate
premiums. Lower numbers indicate better
fire protection.
Law enforcement
115. Columbus currently contracts with the Anoka County Sheriff
for patrol coverage for eight hours a day, five days a week, generally from 3
p.m. to 11 p.m., from a base in Columbus,
at a cost of $150,000 per year. The
Sheriff also provides a police liaison officer to the Columbus elementary schools and additional
services when school is not is session.
At other times the Sheriff’s Department responds to calls, investigates
crimes and patrols the area. The
Sheriff’s Department has 119 sworn officers, including 66 sworn officers in its
patrol division, and responded to 1,770 calls for service in Columbus in 2005. The County
Sheriff and Columbus periodically review the terms of the
contract, and the level of the contract can be increased as needed. If incorporated, Columbus
will continue to contract for services from the County Sheriff.
116. Whether
Columbus is incorporated or not, Anoka County will retain the authority to
handle all criminal prosecutions within the three wildlife management areas
located in Columbus, on behalf of the DNR.
If incorporated, Columbus
would assume responsibility for criminal prosecutions in other parts of the
city at a cost estimated to be between $12,000 and $24,000 per year.
117. Forest Lake
has a full-time Director of Public Safety who is a licensed police officer, 21
full-time and eight part-time sworn officers, and three support staff. The patrol division is staffed 24 hours each
day and responded to 13,795 calls in 2005.
From time to time, Forest
Lake officers drive
through the eastern portion of the I-35 Corridor to check the rest stop on I-35
or to conduct business in that area. Forest
Lake officers will
respond to Mutual Aid calls in the I-35 Corridor upon request of the Anoka
County Sheriff.
118. Annexation
of the eastern portion of the I-35 Corridor would not significantly affect Forest Lake’s
ability to provide police protection and would cost approximately $23,500 per
year. There was no evidence concerning its ability
to serve the western side of the corridor. Some increased Forest
Lake staff time would be required to
travel to the City of Anoka to book persons
arrested in either portion of the I-35 Corridor and to attend Anoka County
court proceedings.
119. Both
the Anoka County Sheriff and the Forest Lake Police have the training and
capacity to provide law enforcement to the I-35 Corridor.
Street Improvements and Maintenance
120. Columbus employs three
full-time employees and two seasonal employees for public works including
street maintenance, and maintains 50.53 miles of Township roads. Columbus
has adopted engineering standards for road construction. The public works staff, under direction of
the Town Manager and with advice from the Public Works Committee, recommends
capital improvements which exceed $5,000.
When its population reaches 5,000, Columbus
will qualify for state aid for road maintenance.
121. Forest Lake
currently provides street maintenance to 116 miles of city streets. Its Public Works Department has a full-time
director and maintenance shop employee, and the street maintenance staff
includes eight full-time and four part-time employees. Forest
Lake budgets an amount
annually for maintenance and capital improvements to its road system.
Forest Lake could take over the responsibility
for the streets in the Annexation Area without adding significantly to its
staff or budget; no evidence was offered about the costs to take over the
streets on the western side of the I-35 Corridor.
122. Hornsby Avenue in
the Annexation Area is in poor repair, and Columbus
is working with MnDOT and Anoka
County to develop a plan
to reconfigure its intersection with TH 97 and then improve the road. Lyons/Elmcrest is shared by Columbus
and Forest Lake and serves a largely undeveloped
area. It is also in need of improvement. In general, Columbus maintains its rural roads well.
123. If
the streets in the I-35 Corridor were included in Forest
Lake, Forest Lake
may be able to qualify for some slight increase in its municipal state aid, but
would see a gross increase of about $39,755 in its street maintenance costs.
Administrative Services
124. Columbus employs a
full-time town manager, town clerk, office assistant and building inspector,
and a part-time treasurer. It contracts
for a city engineer and city planner, and assessment, audit, and legal services
as needed. Its general government budget
for 2006 is $638,345, and its staff is supported by several commissions, boards
and committees.
125. Columbus has a master
plan to develop a new Public Works Building and Town Hall.
126. Because
of its larger population and more dense development, Forest
Lake has a larger city staff than Columbus. It employs 57 full-time and 35 part-time
employees,
and is supported by several commissions, boards and committees.
127. Forest Lake
has seven employees who provide general governmental services, including
financial services, and three full-time employees in the community development
department. It does not anticipate that
it will need to increase staff if the Annexation Area is added to it. It is not clear whether annexation of the
entire I-35 Corridor would require additional staff. Forest
Lake’s budget for general
government is $1,423,007 for 2006.
128. Both
Columbus and Forest Lake
would see an impact on their governmental operations as a result of development
in the I-35 Corridor, including land planning, infrastructure development and
construction, building and site construction and expansion to meet new service
requirements. Although Forest Lake
has a larger staff to absorb the increase, the Columbus staff has demonstrated its ability
and capacity to manage the growth.
Recreational Facilities
129. Columbus operates four
public parks and has three designated undeveloped sites. The parks are maintained by the public works
staff; no staff member is assigned exclusively to park maintenance.
130. Forest Lake
operates 21 public parks. It has one
full-time and 15 part-time employees.
131. Youth
sports programs in the area are operated by the Forest Lake
School District. Columbus
operates a senior center with a part-time coordinator and plans to enhance its
facilities.
132. The
parks in Columbus and Forest Lake
are used by residents of both communities. Increased population in Columbus
and Forest Lake will place additional pressure on
the park system, but both communities have plans for park expansion. Development of the I-35 Corridor is likely to
increase employment, and employees may seek out recreational activities in the
surrounding area, but neither Columbus nor Forest Lake
project an increase in recreational facilities as a direct result of
development of the Corridor. Forest
Lake does anticipate
developing additional community facilities, including a community center and
recreational area as part of the Headwaters Development.
Impact of Proposed Action on the Delivery
of Services
133. In
2004, the Columbus Board of Supervisors included funding for a study of
incorporation in the 2005 budget, and an Incorporation Committee was formed in
April 2005. That Committee met with
several county officials, its engineer, attorney, planner and a city finance
specialist. At the August 2005 Annual
Meeting, residents requested that Columbus
include money to pursue incorporation in the 2006 budget, and $100,000 was
approved for that purpose. A fiscal analysis of incorporation was
prepared,
and the Incorporation Report was prepared and presented to the Town Board on
December 14, 2005. Columbus
engaged in a deliberative, planned process to develop the I-35 Corridor and to
pursue incorporation as a city. Its petition for incorporation was filed on
August 10, 2005.
134. A
five member Board of Supervisors elected at-large currently makes decisions for
Columbus. Conversion to a city will not require a
change in the number or method of electing local officials. Columbus
also has a seven-member Planning Commission, Park Board, Road and Bridge
Committee and an Economic Development Committee that could continue to
function.
135. In
the event that Columbus
is incorporated, it will assume the cost of misdemeanor criminal prosecutions,
estimated to be $12,000 to $24,000 per year, with offsetting revenue from
collection of fines.
136. Columbus has exercised
urban town powers since 1963. In most
respects it operates as a small city government, lacking only the powers of tax
increment financing and municipal state aid (highway) funding. If incorporated, it would assume shore-land
management functions and tobacco and liquor licensing now performed by Anoka County. If Columbus
incorporates, its sewer, water, fire protection, law enforcement street
maintenance and administrative services will not be significantly affected.
137. Columbus currently
exercises jurisdiction over planning and zoning, under the supervision of the
town manager, with the assistance of the town planner, pursuant to contract. Columbus has
an economic development committee that assists in marketing and promoting
development in Columbus
with a focus on the I-35 Corridor. It
currently has access to several types of economic development tools and would
have access to tax increment financing in the event that it were incorporated.
138. Columbus employs a
full-time building inspector to inspect and enforce the State Building
Code. Incorporation will not affect
inspection or enforcement. If the I-35 Corridor were annexed to Forest Lake,
the inspector’s duties would decrease, but it is not clear that a part-time
inspector would be adequate to meet the needs of the balance of Columbus.
139. Since
the 1990’s, Columbus’s land use planning, zoning changes, development of the
water and sewer infrastructure, and transportation planning have all focused on
integrating services on both the east and west side of the I-35 Corridor and
treating it as an integral unit.
140. Columbus has begun to
successfully plan and implement the development of the I-35 Corridor. Incorporation will allow Columbus to continue to develop and implement
long-range planning for the I-35 Corridor, as well as for other portions of the
Township, and to assure that protection of its natural resources and additional
residential and commercial development are carefully coordinated. Columbus
will not incur any unusual administrative or service delivery changes as a
result of incorporation or by development of the I-35 Corridor.
141. Columbus has done the
planning and has the resources to complete the development of utilities in the
I-35 Corridor. Annexation of all or a
portion of the I-35 Corridor would undercut the systematic planning process
that Columbus
has undertaken.
142. Forest Lake
has had no planned process to develop the Annexation Area or the I-35 Corridor,
and no articulated explanation for its attempt to annex only the eastern
portion of the Corridor. In March 2005,
the mayor of Forest Lake was contacted by landowners in the I-35 Corridor
about whether Forest
Lake might have an
interest in annexation of that area. The
mayor and city administrator met with about six residents who asked a number of
questions about city policies and practices, and the process for requesting
annexation. A second meeting was held in
late March or early April. Forest Lake
provided information about taxes and its water system, and its long range
plan. In early August, a group of
landowners in the Annexation Area notified Forest Lake
of its intent to file a petition for annexation.
143. Prior
to receiving a petition from some residents of the Annexation Area in August
2005, Forest Lake had no plans to extend public utilities into the area, had
conducted no public meetings addressing annexation, had not engaged Columbus or
the surrounding communities in discussion of annexation, and had not included
any discussion of the possible expansion into Columbus in its submissions to
the Metropolitan Council. Its evidence
concerning the delivery of services to the western portion of the I-35 Corridor
was incomplete.
144. Forest Lake
has the capacity to take over the sewer development previously installed by Columbus and to expand
it, but it has not discussed the timing of future development with the property
owners or developed a staging plan. Forest Lake
has no reasonable plan or timetable to extend water service to the I-35
Corridor, and preliminary plans would require that the Metropolitan Council
approve expansion of Forest
Lake’s water service
through an area that does not currently have MUSA designation. There is no evidence that development of the
I-35 Corridor is a priority for Forest
Lake. Its Capital Improvement Plan would require
updating to address the additional roads and capital expenditures needed in the
annexed area.
145. Annexation
of the Annexation Area or the entire I-35 Corridor by Forest
Lake would disrupt on-going services
and implementation of the sewer and water system by Columbus.
Existing
or potential environmental problems and whether the proposed action is likely
to improve or resolve these problems.
146. There
are no known environmental problems in Columbus. The Town provides on-going monitoring of
Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS), and has adopted standards that
exceed the Minnesota Pollution Control Standards. There have been no recent failures of ISTS in
Columbus. Its restrictions on lot size and cooperation
with the DNR have aided in the protection of its natural resources and wetland
management. In conjunction with the Rice Creek Watershed
District, Columbus
is developing a surface water management plan. New development requires the approval of the
affected watershed district. Neither
incorporation nor annexation is likely to improve or resolve existing or
potential environmental problems in the I-35 Corridor or in Columbus.
147. There
are some identified potential environmental hazards within the AUAR area to the
east of the I-35 Corridor in Forest
Lake. There is no evidence that those potential
hazards would affect the I-35 Corridor or other portions of Columbus.
Fiscal impact
on the subject area and adjacent units of local government, including present
bonded indebtedness; local tax rates of the county, school district, and other
governmental units, including, where applicable, the net tax capacity of
platted and unplatted lands and the division of homestead and nonhomestead
property; and other tax and governmental aid issues.
148. Columbus uses a general
fund and special revenue funds for key service areas. Sanitary sewer and water systems will operate
as separate enterprise funds, which enables Columbus to set user charges to meet its
costs. Both Columbus
and Forest Lake have adequate fund balances to meet
future operating and investment demands, manage cash flow, respond to
unexpected expenditures and increase financial stability.
149. Since
2001, both Columbus and Forest Lake
have had a steady increase in their property market value and tax capacity,
which forms the basis for generating property tax revenue. Property tax is based on the estimated market
value of the property, and the conversion of that value to the tax capacity
value, which is dependent upon the class of property. Columbus
has developed the I-35 Corridor in order to increase the amount of commercial
and industrial property and diversify its tax base.
150. At
the present time, the tax rate in Columbus
exceeds the tax rate in Forest
Lake.
151. If
the Annexation Area were annexed to Forest
Lake, its tax base would increase by
less than 1 percent; Columbus
would lose 3.4 percent of its tax base. There was no evidence of the impact of
annexation of the entire corridor, but it would be a significantly greater loss
to Columbus.
152. Springsted
Incorporated conducted a fiscal analysis for Columbus of the impact of incorporation,
including a detailed analysis of the potential fiscal impact. It concluded that, if incorporated, Columbus would:
a.
Lose about $20,000 of county road aid, but could
qualify for state highway aid funds when its population increased to 5000;
b.
Be required to assume the annual costs of
prosecution of crimes, currently covered by the county, and estimated to
be $12,000 to $24,000 per year;
c.
Be eligible to collect fee and fine revenue of
approximately $15,000 annually;
d.
Be eligible for local government aid from the
state, approximately $24,720 annually; and
e.
Property taxes would likely decrease from 5.98%
to 8.49% in the first year following incorporation (largely because of the
elimination of one-time incorporation costs).
153. Moody’s
Investors Services has assigned Columbus an A3 credit rating and expects its
financial position to remain sound “due to prudent management, growing property
tax and fee revenues, and the maintenance of favorable reserves;”
Columbus has General Fund reserves estimated to be 84% of General Fund
revenues. White
Bear Township
is the only other township in the metropolitan region that has a bond
rating.
154. As
recently as 2003, Forest Lake’s bond rating was BAA2, a lower level than the
current Columbus
rating. Forest
Lake currently has an A1 credit
rating, two steps higher than the Columbus
rating. This could allow Forest Lake
to borrow money at more favorable rates than Columbus.
Columbus
has bonded indebtedness of $5,386,218, from bonds issued in 2003, 2004 and 2005,
largely to fund the development of the sewer system, water system and some road
improvements. Several of the bonds will
be paid in whole or part from special assessments.
155. Both
Columbus and Forest Lake
have additional capacity to incur debt to support public improvements. Columbus
has retained Springsted Incorporated to assist its future debt planning, and
evaluate future financing options.
156. At
the time of the hearing, Forest Lake had no plan for assuming any of the Columbus debt obligation or for compensating Columbus for its
investment in infrastructure.
If Forest Lake
annexes all or a portion of the I-35 Corridor it would obtain the improvements
financed by the bonds and the properties that have benefited from the
investment in infrastructure. The properties in the Annexation Area represent
44% of the total assessments from the 2004A Bonds that financed the trunk
sanitary sewer system. Similar issues
are raised about payment of some of the bonds issued in 2005. In the event that annexation were ordered, it
would be necessary to calculate a reasonable method for reimbursing Columbus
for its investment and receiving current and deferred assessment income.
157. Loss
of the Annexation Area to Forest Lake could increase Columbus’s property tax rate by 3.17% to 7.7%
in 2007. Annexation would increase Forest Lake’s
property tax by less than one percent in the same year, but decrease the taxes
of persons living in the annexation area. There is no evidence of the effect of
annexation of the entire I-35 Corridor.
In its analysis of the proposed annexation, Forest
Lake assumed that the western portion
of the I-35 Corridor would be developed and provide an increased tax base for Columbus, and based its
estimate of lost tax base on annexation of only the eastern portion. However, its expert conceded that if both
sides of the I-35 Corridor were annexed, the loss of tax base to Columbus and increase to Forest Lake
would be greater because more of the property on the west side has been
developed.
158. In
the short term, the benefit to Forest
Lake from revenues from
taxes and state aid in the Annexation Area will be offset by increased costs to
serve the area. Forest
Lake has not analyzed the
revenues and expenses for the I-35 Corridor as a whole. Neither Columbus
nor Forest Lake could predict with any degree of
certainty what the increased tax base would be in the I-35 Corridor over the
next 20 to 40 years as the water and sewer infrastructure is completed and
commercial and industrial development occurs, but both parties anticipate that
there will be significant growth. In general, the overall tax base in both Columbus and Forest
Lake is likely to
increase because of the growth in the metropolitan area.
159. At
the present time, Columbus does not expend a great deal to provide the I-35
Corridor with police, fire, recreation, street maintenance or other services,
and thus will not realize much savings, nor will Forest Lake incur significant
expense, if the I-35 Corridor is annexed in whole or in part. As the area develops, costs will increase,
regardless of whether the area is annexed, incorporated or remains as it
is. The speed of development, rather
than the type of governance, is more likely to affect the costs.
160. Columbus has the resources
necessary to efficiently and economically operate as a city.
161. The
proposed incorporation or annexation would have no direct impact on the County,
School District or other taxing districts. Annexation is not likely to alter the
facility needs of the School District, but
development in the I-35 Corridor will increase the tax base. There was no conclusive evidence that either
annexation or incorporation would speed that development.
162. The
nearby cities of Lino
Lakes and Hugo are not
likely to be directly affected by either annexation or incorporation because
they do not provide services or derive income from the I-35 Corridor. Annexation or incorporation may decrease the
likelihood that either of those cities would annex a portion of Columbus in the future.
163. Both
Columbus and Forest Lake
are financially stable and have the financial capacity to adequately and effectively
deliver services. Forest
Lake has greater
resources because of its greater size, but there are also has several areas
within the city where development is occurring that are competing for its
resources.
164. Columbus would lose tax base and infrastructure, as well
as the benefits of its comprehensive planning, if Forest Lake
annexed either the Annexation Area or the I-35 Corridor.
Relationship
and effect of the proposed action on affected and adjacent school districts and
communities.
165. Schools
in Columbus and Forest Lake
are not expected to be affected by either annexation or incorporation.
166. Several
surrounding communities have expressed support for Columbus
incorporation, including Anoka County, East Bethel, Linwood
Township, Hugo,
Wyoming Township, Ham
Lake, and Blaine.
167. Anoka County
opposes annexation of the Annexation Area to Forest Lake.
168. Neither
incorporation nor annexation is likely to have an effect on the City of Lino
Lakes.
Whether
delivery of services to the subject area can be adequately and economically
delivered by township government or would be best provided through
incorporation, annexation or another type of boundary adjustment.
169. For
the past 25 years, Columbus
has increasingly functioned as a small city, and not as a township. It has taken over virtually all aspects of
local government and hired a professional staff to manage its affairs. It has conscientiously complied with
regulations concerning protection of the abundant natural resources in its area
and enacted its own regulations to enhance and protect those resources and its
rural character. Although Columbus has retained the
township form of government to this point, it has in effect operated as a
city. If incorporation were denied, Columbus could continue
to exercise its stewardship of the area, but would be susceptible to continued
encroachment of and annexation by the surrounding cities. By incorporating, Columbus will be better able to commit to
long-range planning for development within its boundaries and the protection of
its natural resources.
Applicability
of the State Building Code.
170. Columbus complies with
the State Building Code and employs a full-time building inspector to
administer it. Neither incorporation nor annexation will
affect its applicability.
Additional Factors Applicable to Proposed
Annexation, as set forth in Minn.
Stat. § 414.031, subd. 4.
Plans and
programs by the annexing municipality for providing needed governmental
services to the subject area.
171. Prior
to the time that the City Administrator and Mayor met with some property owners
in March 2005, Forest
Lake had not done any
analysis of proposed annexation.
Thereafter, prior to filing the petition for annexation, it did a “quick
and dirty” study of its ability to provide services to the annexation area. In response to the Petition for Annexation, Forest Lake
has developed some plans to serve the Annexation Area. Because of Forest
Lake’s size and financial stability,
the relatively small size of the Annexation Area and the entire I-35 Corridor,
it is likely that Forest
Lake could plan for and
provide services to the area. However,
it does not have a timeline, budget or capital plan to do so. Police Chief Quiring, Mr. Ruff and Mr. Gravel
all testified that they were not aware of any specific plans to serve the
Annexation Area.
172. There
was no evidence that Forest Lake discussed the proposed annexation of a portion
of Columbus with Anoka
County or Washington County
or neighboring communities.
If only a
part of the township were annexed, the ability of the remainder of the township
to continue or the feasibility of it being incorporated separately or being
annexed to another municipality.
173. There
is no justification for annexing just the Annexation Area to Forest Lake. The I-35 Corridor is being planned and
developed as one area, and the freeway is the unifying feature rather than a
natural boundary. On both sides of the
I-35 Corridor, wetlands provide a buffer to residential neighborhoods, as
reflected in Forest Lake’s plan for a conservancy or parks and recreation to
the east of the I-35 Corridor, and the natural boundary created by the Rice
Creek Chain of Lakes on the west side.
174. If
the entire I-35 Corridor were annexed to Forest
Lake, Columbus could be incorporated, but it would
lose the benefits of the planning it has completed and the potential
commercial/industrial tax base in the Corridor.
Although Columbus
would still have a small amount of developable commercial/industrial land along
Lake Drive,
it would have less incentive to manage and develop that land in a manner that
complemented the I-35 Corridor and the surrounding residential areas because of
its small size and development potential.
175. Although
Columbus could continue to provide a rural level
of service in the short-term, as the population and development increase in
several adjoining communities, pressure will continue to grow on the road
system, recreational facilities, and developable land in Columbus.
Without the I-35 Corridor, Columbus
will have little additional tax base to support the demand for increased
services required by the increasingly urban and suburban development of the
entire region.
176. Incorporation
will allow Columbus
to continue to develop as a rural residential area, which will help protect the
boundaries of the large wildlife management areas and maintain a level of
development consistent with their intended uses including hunting, and protect
critical habitat and wetlands.
177. There
will be little effect on Forest
Lake if the annexation is
denied except for the loss of the potential tax base from future development of
commercial/industrial land within the I-35 Corridor. Its Comprehensive Plan does not rely upon or
plan for the development of the Annexation Area, the I-35 Corridor, or the land
immediately contiguous to it. Its plans
for commercial/industrial development are centered along I-35 north of SW 11th Avenue,
along West Broadway, and along Highway 61, and not along I-35 south of Trunk
Highway 97, which it has planned for conservancy or park land. Although it may face pressure to develop west
into Columbus
along Broadway Avenue,
it is not proposing to annex that land and apparently has no immediate plans to
do so.
178. There
is no evidence to support annexation of the Annexation Area, the I-35 Corridor,
or the balance of Columbus
to any other city.
Degree of
Contiguity of the Boundaries of the Subject Area and Adjacent Units of Local
Government
179. Columbus’s current boundaries have been in place for 150
years, and its eastern border is also the eastern border of Anoka County. The Annexation Area abuts a portion of the
western border of Forest
Lake, and a small strip
of wetland runs along the east side of the border. Forest
Lake’s initial position
was that I-35 was a natural boundary on the western side of the Annexation
Area. Although it has not entirely
abandoned that position, Forest
Lake now asserts that the
western edge of the I-35 Corridor is a clear, recognizable border, and that
annexation should include the entire I-35 Corridor. The western edge of the I-35 Corridor borders
the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Wildlife Management Area.
180. I-35
cuts through both Columbus and Forest Lake;
it does not follow either boundary, and both communities have planned for and
developed land on both sides of the highway.
Because the sewer and water infrastructure has been planned to serve
both sides of the corridor, I-35 is not a natural boundary.
181. There
is no single clear delineation between the two communities. The location of the I-35 freeway
interchanges, shared mailing address, school system, fire protection and road
system minimize the perceived significance of the geographical boundary.
Public
Comment
182. Most
residents who testified at the public hearing were satisfied with the services
that Columbus
is providing to them, including fire and police protection, administrative
services and road maintenance. Most were
satisfied that Columbus
has planned appropriately for the development of the I-35 Corridor, and they
have confidence in their paid staff and the appointed boards, commissions and
committees to continue to provide the necessary level of oversight for future
development. Many would like to preserve
the present, historical boundaries of Columbus
and object to any annexation by Forest
Lake. They would like to continue to plan and guide
development for all of Columbus.
183. Some
citizens informally contacted persons who owned land within the I-35 Corridor
to determine who supported incorporation and who supported annexation. The results of their efforts are reflected on
Public Exhibit 11, which is roughly consistent with the other public testimony
offered, and with Exhibit 578, Figure 1.5. Persons favoring annexation generally own
property east of the freeway north of 145th Avenue, in the northern
end of the annexation area, and in proximity to the land to be developed as a
harness racing track.
184. Some
residents of Columbus and Forest Lake
did not support incorporation. In some
instances, these residents do not believe that the Columbus Town Board has
fairly and dispassionately considered whether annexation is appropriate, and
others believe that Forest
Lake can better serve the
I-35 Corridor because it has more highly developed and staffed city services. One speaker opposed both incorporation and
annexation at this time, believing that Columbus in not likely to increase in
population to the point that it can benefit from economies of scale, and that
with additional time for reflection, the better result could be annexation of
portions of the township to East Bethel, Forest Lake or Lino Lakes in order to
obtain those economies.
185. Because
Forest Lake has not formally proposed
annexation of the entire I-35 Corridor, it is uncertain which property owners
on the west side of the corridor favor annexation, incorporation or neither one. Some individuals who originally petitioned Forest Lake
for annexation no longer support annexation.
186. Although
there has been no referendum on incorporation, there is strong public support
for it in Columbus,
as reflected by the large number of postcards of support filed with the
Columbus Town Clerk.
Based on these Findings of Fact, the Administrative Law Judge makes the
following:
CONCLUSIONS
1.
The Administrative Law Judge has jurisdiction in
this matter through the Office of
Municipal Boundary Adjustments, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 414.01, 414.02,
414.031 and 414.12 and the assignment by the Director of the Municipal Boundary
Adjustments Unit to the Office of Administrative Hearings.
2.
Proper notice of the hearing in this matter has
been given.
3.
The Town of Columbus is about to become urban or suburban
in character. Columbus is in the process of developing the
I-35 Corridor for commercial and industrial use characteristic of urban
development. The remainder of Columbus is suburban, and
incorporation is necessary to protect the open space and rural residential
areas from encroachment and to assure appropriate land use planning. Incorporation will assure sound urban
development of the I-35 Corridor and the preservation of open space, and assure
that municipal services are available throughout Columbus as needed.
4.
Municipal government is required to protect the
public health, safety and welfare of Columbus.
5.
Incorporation is in the best interests of Columbus.
6.
Annexation of the east side of the I-35 Corridor,
or the entire I-35 Corridor, by Forest
Lake is not in the best interest of
the subject area and would create undue hardship on the remainder of Columbus.
7.
Neither the Annexation Area nor the I-35
Corridor would be better served by Forest
Lake.
8.
The increase in tax revenues for Forest Lake
would bear a reasonable relationship to the monetary value of the benefits
conferred upon the area included in the Annexation Petition. However, it cannot be determined on this
record if the increase in tax revenues for Forest Lake
would bear a reasonable relationship to the monetary value of the benefits
conferred upon the entire I-35 Corridor. Moreover, continued development in the I-35
Corridor will increase the taxable value of the property, but it cannot be determined
from this record whether the future increase in revenues for Forest Lake
would exceed the reasonable value of benefits conferred on the I-35 Corridor if
annexation were granted.
9.
Both Columbus and
Forest Lake
have the capacity to serve the I-35 Corridor, but Forest Lake
does not have a plan to do so if annexation is granted.
10.
No adjustment of the Columbus boundaries is necessary.
11.
These Conclusions are arrived at for the reasons
set out in the following Memorandum, which is incorporated into these
Conclusions by reference.
Based upon these Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and for the reasons set
forth in the accompanying Memorandum, the Administrative Law Judge makes the
following:
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED THAT:
1.
The Petition for Incorporation (I-68) of Columbus Township is GRANTED;
2.
Incorporation shall be effective upon the
election and qualification of the new
City Council as set out in paragraph 3 of this Order;
3.
The form of government shall be “Optional Plan
A.” An election shall be held not less
than 45 days nor more than 60 days of the effective date of this Order to elect
a mayor and four council persons at large who shall serve until January 1,
2007. Elizabeth Mursko shall be the
acting clerk for the election and she shall prepare the official ballot. Affidavits of candidacy shall be filed not
more than four weeks and not less than two weeks before the date of the
election. The polling place shall be
Columbus Township Hall and the Election Judges shall be appointed from those
serving in the last Town election. The
hours of the election shall be 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.;
4.
An election of a mayor and four council members
shall be held on November 7, 2006. The
mayor and two city council members shall be elected for a two-year term
commencing January 1, 2007, and two city council members shall be elected for a
four-year term commencing January 1, 2007.
Thereafter the city council members shall be elected for four year
terms;
5.
In all other respects, the elections shall be
conducted in conformity with the provisions of the Minnesota Statutes
concerning the conduct of municipal elections insofar as applicable;
6.
The ordinances of Columbus
Township, as well as the Land Use and
Planning Controls and other ordinances, and all license privileges, shall remain
in effect within the boundaries of Columbus until repealed or replaced by the new
governing body of the City of Columbus;
7.
Upon incorporation, all money, claims, or
properties including real estate owned, held or possessed by the former
Columbus Township, and any proceeds or taxes levied by Columbus Township,
collected and uncollected, shall become the property of and inure to the
benefit of the newly incorporated City with full power and authority to use and
dispose of for such public purposes as the council deems best subject to claims
of the creditors. This will include cash
reserves and fund balances of the Township and all public property and
equipment held by Columbus Township.
8.
Columbus
Township’s outstanding
indebtedness, if any, will become the financial obligation of the newly
incorporated City.
9.
The Petition by Forest Lake
to Annex Certain Portions of Columbus Township (A-7371) is DENIED;
10.
The Order Denying Motion to Dismiss and accepted
the Petition by Forest
Lake to Annex Certain
Portions of Columbus Township, issued April 10, 2006, is reaffirmed and
incorporated herein;
11.
This Order is effective July 21, 2006.
Dated: July 6, 2006
s/Beverly
Jones Heydinger
|
BEVERLY
JONES HEYDINGER
Administrative
Law Judge
|
Reported: Transcript
Prepared
Kirby
A. Kennedy & Associates
NOTICE
This Order is the final administrative
order in this case under Minn. Stat. §§ 414.02, 414.031, 414.07 and
414.09. Any person aggrieved by this
Order may appeal to Anoka County District Court by filing an Application for
Review with the Court Administrator within 30 days of the date of this
Order. An appeal does not stay the
effect of this Order.
Any party may submit a written request
for an amendment of these Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Order within seven
days from the date of the mailing of the Order pursuant to Minn. R.
6000.3100. However, no request for
amendment shall extend the time of appeal from these Findings of Fact,
Conclusions and Order.
MEMORANDUM
This proceeding was commenced by Columbus Township
when it filed a petition for incorporation.
The City of Forest Lake opposed incorporation, and filed a petition to
annex the eastern portion of the I-35 Corridor, referred to as the Annexation
Area. As the hearing in this matter
progressed, however, it became apparent that the planning for the entire I-35
Corridor and services to it should be managed by one town or city. In its post-hearing submissions, Forest Lake
argued for annexation of the entire I-35 Corridor.
Taking into account the factors set forth in Minn. Stat. §§
414.02 and 414.031, and the goals promoting municipal development set forth in
Minn. Stat. § 414.01, subd. 1b, it is apparent that, on balance, Columbus’s petition for incorporation should be granted
and Forest Lake’s annexation petition should be
denied.
The goals for the extension of municipal government are to
assure that urban services are planned and contiguous to developing areas, that
areas are developed only as needed, and are designed to protect the stability
of land use. Although there is a
presumption that open space and rural residential uses can be protected by an
unincorporated township, the goals emphasize the integrity of land use planning
and efficient local government. In this
case, although much of Columbus
will retain its rural residential level of development, that level of
development is dictated in large part by the type of terrain, and not by its
distance from the rapidly developing communities around it. Incorporation will help Columbus maintain the integrity of its
expansive area of natural resources and plan development in a way that will
help protect those resources for the metropolitan area as a whole. In addition, it is undisputed that
development is moving rapidly north along I-35, and that there is substantial
pressure to develop that portion of Columbus at urban densities. That pressure was acknowledged in the
Metropolitan Council’s designation of the I-35 Corridor in Columbus as part of the MUSA, eligible for
connection to the metropolitan sewer interceptor.
Another goal expressed in statute is to form a municipality
when it has the necessary resources to operate economically and efficiently. Columbus
has steadily developed the resources to function as a municipality.
Columbus is about to become urban
or suburban in character.
The parties
are in agreement that the I-35 Corridor is now or is about to be urban or
suburban in character and should receive municipal services in order to protect
the public health, safety and welfare of the area. The metropolitan area is growing rapidly, and
pressure from that growth is affecting Columbus
because of its proximity to both Minneapolis and
Saint Paul, and other rapidly expanding
communities such as Forest
Lake, as well as its
location along I-35.
There is no evidence that development will occur only on the eastern side
of I-35 in the Annexation Area, and clear evidence that the two sides of the
I-35 Corridor are being developed together.
Forest Lake failed to show the logic of
dividing the eastern portion of the system from the western portion. Its expert stated only that the freeway
constituted a reasonable boundary for orderly extension of Forest Lake. Apparently, based on the evidence presented
at the hearing, Forest Lake has abandoned that position and now asserts that
the entire I-35 Corridor should be planned and developed by one community,
annexed to Forest
Lake. Its Planning Report, submitted by John
Shardow, stated:
The planning and intended
land uses in the annexation area, the fact that trunk sewer lines and a lift
station are located within the annexation area, and the location relative to
transportation access suggest that it is now, or will become, urban or suburban
in character. Further, the annexation
area is also isolated from all other development in Columbus Township….
It is clear that this statement applies equally to the entire I-35
Corridor since the western portion is not isolated from the Annexation Area and
both have transportation access.
Outside of the I-35 Corridor, Columbus is
developing as a suburb, a small community within easy commuting distance of a
larger city, Forest Lake, and in this instance, within commuting distance
of the major cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul. Because of its topography and proximity to large
protected natural resources, Columbus
will have little medium or dense residential development in other parts of the
township within the next 30 years.
However, the growth in the surrounding communities will increase the
pressure on Columbus’s
transportation network, and increase the pressure to develop larger scale,
denser residential development in proximity to its protected areas and near its
borders. By incorporating, Columbus will reinforce
its commitment to controlling and regulating that development in a manner
consistent with its classification as a diversified rural area, and enhance its
continued participation in collaborative planning for the rapidly growing
area.
Mr. Shardlow testified that a suburb is an area that is now or about to
become connected to urban services, specifically sewer and water, and other
areas that are defined by large residential lots, not connected to sewer and
water should be more appropriately defined as exurban. However, he acknowledged that Columbus is within commuting distance of the Twin Cities,
and that Lino Lakes to its south is suburban.
Protecting the stability of unincorporated area not
presently needed for more intensive uses.
Columbus is required by
the Metropolitan Council to plan for its growth precisely because of its
location and problems created by unplanned development. The I-35 Corridor and the area surrounding
Columbus is presently needed for intensive development, and this is likely to
extend inside the Columbus
borders. By assuming urban town powers, Columbus has engaged in
planning as a city, and its detailed zoning and land use regulations, as well
as its participation in regional planning efforts, reflect this.
Arguably Columbus
could continue to operate as it currently does, using its powers as an urban
town. But it will be better able to plan and invest in infrastructure if it is
incorporated and attains equal footing with the surrounding communities. Incorporation does not prevent annexation by
another community. However, if Columbus is incorporated,
it is more likely that the surrounding communities will plan cooperatively, and
annexation efforts will proceed with greater thought, consultation and
planning.
Incorporation will protect the integrity of land use
planning.
The goals for municipal development favor thoughtful planning. In this case, Columbus began to plan for incorporation with
the submission of its Comprehensive Plan in 1999, and its initiation of an
incorporation study in 2004. It has
steadily moved ahead to put into place the administrative and financial systems
required to assume status as a city, and it has concrete plans and a timeline
for development of the I-35 Corridor. In
contrast, although Forest
Lake already has
administrative systems in place, it had no plan at all for the Annexation Area
until it was approached by a group of landowners in 2005. At the time the Annexation Petition was
filed, Forest Lake commissioned studies to create a
record for this proceeding. However, the
studies were not developed as a guide for planning, did not include a timeline
for implementation, and did not address compensation to Columbus for its investment in
infrastructure. Its lack of thorough, thoughtful planning is
reflected by its change of position after the hearing to seek annexation of the
I-35 Corridor as a whole.
Consideration of the
factors set forth in Minn.
Stat. §§ 414.02, subd. 3 and 414.031, subd. 4.
Each of the factors is detailed in the findings of fact and was fully
considered in reaching the decision to incorporation of Columbus.
Certain aspects are emphasized here.
Present population and number of households, past
population and projected population growth for the subject area.
The population is growing rapidly in
both Anoka and Washington
Counties, and particularly in Forest Lake. The population of Columbus is growing more slowly, in large
part because of the natural barriers preventing development. However, it is clear that the booming growth
of the surrounding area is having an impact on Columbus.
Although its population may continue to grow slowly, the demands to
participate in regional planning are likely to increase. For example, pressure for improvements to
I-35 and TH 97, and regional planning for the entire 1-35 Corridor north to
Hinckley, required city-like planning and participation, and Columbus responded. Those demands will increase as urban
development intensifies in the surrounding area. Similarly, significant growth in population
throughout the area will increase the pressure on the protected natural
resources in Columbus,
requiring increased cooperation and planning among state, county and local
governments.
Quantity of land within the subject area; the natural
terrain including recognizable physical features, general topography, major
watersheds, soil conditions and such natural features as rivers, lakes and
major bluffs.
One of the distinguishing features of Columbus is the vast
expanse of wildlife management areas, lakes and wetlands. In order to protect these natural resources,
development must be limited and carefully controlled. There is very little area in Columbus except the I-35
Corridor that can be developed for commercial and industrial use. Forest
Lake has sufficient land
to allow for its growth. It does not
need to annex any portion of the I-35 Corridor to meet its needs.
Present pattern of physical development, planning, and
intended land uses in the subject area including residential, industrial,
commercial, agricultural, and institutional land uses and the impact of the
proposed action on those uses.
Columbus
is now, and will remain, largely rural residential because of its natural
characteristics. However, the increasing
traffic along I-35 virtually assures that the pressure for development in the
corridor will continue. Columbus has a plan to
meet that demand through the design and implementation of public utilities to
the entire corridor. The balance of Columbus will experience
pressure at its margins from surrounding communities. Incorporation will
further Columbus’s
efforts to cooperate in the planning and controlled development of the entire
area. Annexation to Forest Lake
will do nothing to protect the land in Columbus
that is outside of the I-35 Corridor, will remove the one portion of Columbus that is likely to
generate significant commercial and industrial tax base, and decrease both the
incentive and resources for continued planning and involvement. Because the utilities have been planned for
the I-35 Corridor as a whole, there is no rationale for annexing the eastern
portion to Forest
Lake. That would simply leave Columbus with a smaller and incomplete system
to manage, without any apparent benefit to the subject area.
Prior to the filing of the annexation petition, Forest Lake
had no plans to extend urban services to the border of the Annexation Area
within the timeframe of its Comprehensive Plan or within its proposed plan
amendment for the Headwaters development.
Although Forest
Lake has the capacity to
develop such a plan, it does not have a timeline to implement it. The uncertainty caused by annexation would
upset the on-going planning and development within the I-35 Corridor. The balance of Forest Lake
would not be affected by annexation.
It is obvious from the maps of the area that the I-35 Corridor is
somewhat isolated from the rest of the township because of the large wetlands
west of the corridor. However, it is
also clear that the traffic moves across the wetlands on the existing roads,
and that Columbus
has focused its development efforts within the corridor for the past several
years. The corridor’s isolation is less
significant because Columbus
has no immediate plans to provide sewer and water to the other parts of the
township. Although this isolation might
support annexation of the entire corridor, Forest Lake
has not analyzed or planned to serve the western side of the corridor. To meet those demands, Forest
Lake could do little more than take
over and expand the Columbus
system.
The present transportation system and potential
transportation issues, including proposed highway development.
Both Columbus
and Forest Lake are involved in planning to
increase capacity and decrease congestion of the road system, particularly at
the intersections with I-35. Columbus does not anticipate
developing new major roads because of the natural limitations presented by its
terrain. Forest Lake
will develop new roads outside the Annexation Area to accommodate new
residential development. Regardless of
incorporation or annexation, there is a need to address reconstruction of Hornsby Avenue,
which serves the Annexation Area, and its intersection with TH 97. Columbus
has begun working with other agencies to do the necessary planning. Once Columbus
attains a population of 5000, it may be able to access state highway aid funds
for which it does not presently qualify.
However, in light of the relatively small amount of additional money
that would be available to Forest
Lake for Hornsby Avenue
redevelopment, it is not a significant factor in the decision to grant
incorporation or deny annexation.
Land use controls and planning presently being utilized
in the subject area, including comprehensive plans, policies of the
Metropolitan Council; and whether there are inconsistencies between proposed
development and existing land use controls.
Both Columbus
and Forest Lake have approved Comprehensive Plans
and adequate zoning regulations in place.
Both expect to file amended plans with the Metropolitan Council in
2008. There are no apparent inconsistencies
between the proposed development and existing land controls. If annexation were granted to Forest Lake,
it would be required to amend its Comprehensive Plan to deliver utilities to
the I-35 Corridor.
Existing levels of governmental services being provided
to the subject area, including water and sewer service, fire rating and
protection, law enforcement, street improvements and maintenance,
administrative services, and recreational facilities and the impact of the
proposed action on the delivery of the services.
The existing level of governmental
service is set forth in detail in the Findings of Fact and will not be restated
here. Overall, Columbus
is currently providing the level of service typical of a small city, and Forest Lake
is providing the level of service typical of a larger city. Incorporation will not significantly impact
the delivery of services. If annexation
were granted, it is likely that Forest
Lake could deliver services to the
Annexation Area, but it would hamper Columbus’s
efforts to provide utilities only on the western side of the corridor. Although the size of the I-35 Corridor is not
large, Forest Lake
did not offer evidence of the effect annexation of the entire Corridor would
have on its delivery of services or on Columbus. Some services, including fire protection and
schools, will not be affected by either annexation or incorporation.
Much of the focus at the hearing was on the relative ability of the two
communities to plan, install and operate sewer and water to the Annexation
Area. Although Forest
Lake criticized Columbus
for the length of time it had taken to plan and implement the system, Forest Lake
also claimed that development in the western side of the I-35 Corridor had been
premature and had not promoted the highest and best use for the land. Although at this time, the infrastructure
only serves property owners on the west side of the I-35 Corridor, Columbus is
in the process of establishing infrastructure to serve both sides so that
service can be installed as the property owners request it. It has not yet received requests to extend
services to the Annexation Area. Forest Lake
witnesses conceded that it was premature to install services in the Annexation
Area until property owners requested them.
Both Columbus and Forest Lake
expect that the rate of development will speed up in the next few years as the
infrastructure is completed.
Forest Lake also criticized the lack of
planning for the southern portion of the Annexation Area, but its own plan for
that area would take many years to implement.
The two communities may wish to cooperate to develop the southern
portion of the Annexation Area and the southwestern portion of Forest Lake. But because of its proximity to the
interstate highway, it is quite likely that the demand for development within
the southern portion of the Annexation Area will occur well before the
extension of Forest
Lake to its adjoining
boundary. The Annexation Area falls in
the 2010 MUSA boundary, but Forest
Lake’s plans to extend
sewer and water from the 2040 urban reserve to the east would require a MUSA
adjustment. Although the MUSA line can
be revised, it is apparent that Forest
Lake’s current
development plans call for extension of services into the adjoining area well
after 2010.
Forest Lake
also criticized the method that Columbus
employed to allocate the costs to install water and sewer. Although there may be a difference of opinion
about the best way to handle the assessment of the costs, the evidence was
clear that Columbus
has managed its finances properly, that it has the necessary revenue stream to
meets its obligations, and that it is fiscally stable. It is up to the voters of Columbus to decide if its elected officials
have proceeded in their best interest.
There is no basis to conclude that Columbus
assessed the costs in a manner that was fiscally irresponsible.
Because it is a larger city, Forest
Lake has a larger staff
and more financial resources. Its
competent, professional staff could undoubtedly rise to the responsibility of
serving the I-35 Corridor if required to do so.
It has greater experience with urban development, with the operation of
public utilities and with delivering city services. Because the I-35 Corridor is relatively
small, it is likely that over time,