Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06 22 2015 5 Sanitary Sewer Alternatives
Sanitary Sewer Alternatives to Serve Annexation Area - DRAFT Alternative SMSC Agreement No Agreement with Assessment Using MN Alternative Route' Do Nothing/No Annexation (SMSC Project) SMSC or Agreement Statutes 429 to Southwest* Description,' after property into (City Project) Trust Route Stemmer Ridge Stemmer Ridge Road Stemmer Ridge Road CSAH 17/Other Routes No Route Road 'Pipe Material Cost Total Utility Cost Assessments(Assumes Construction Cost Met Council Fines-City tv Short Cost to City $778,000 (Materials&Labor) City unable to Assess) $7,000,000-$9,750,000 2730 Residential Units @ $1,500,000 $3,636,000 $5,000/SAC unit(Not Inspection Portion of Built System including Commercial Areas) $100,000 Inspection Trunk Expenditures Unused $13,650,000 `i $100,000 $1,349,000 $1,200,000 Portion of Built System (All Trunk (All Trunk (All Trunk Expenditures) Unused Expenditures) Expenditures) $4,255,000 (Funding Source Unknown) Total Cost Total Cost$878,000 Total Cost$1,600,000 Total Cost$4,984,000 $8,200,000-$10,950,000 Total Cost$18,000,000+ Risks/ 1. Enforceability 1. Enforceability 1. Assessment 1. County denies permit 1. Met Council imposes fines 2. Future SMSC 2. Future SMSC challenges 2.Unknown route 2. Find new annexation area - Challenges purchases purchases 2. Assessment collection challenges 3. Unknown route challenges 3. Endorsement of 3. Right of way 3. Eminent domain 3.Future SMSC 4. Environmental Impacts as application permanence challenges purchases portions of property 4. SMSC charges for 4. Future SMSC 4.Budget Increases within City limits go Street Oversizing purchases 5.Increased taxes to unserved forever ($652,000-Not 5. Bonding of$3.6 M current residents S. Increased taxes to current included in costs 6. SMSC relationship residents above) 7. Bond rating reduction 6. Greater sprawl 8. Timing 7. Property owner litigation `Estimating for these scenarios is more difficult due to many more unknowns. 4/28/2015 DRAFT ENGINEERS ESTIMATE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE Alternative Route to Serve Annexation Area(Spring Lake Regional Park) DESCRIPTION UNIT CITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL.PRICE TREE REMOVAL ACRE 4.5 $ 15,000.W i 67,600.00 TRAIL RECONSTRUCTION SQ YD 7500 S 26.00 s 195,o00.00 FORCEMAIN PIPE LIN FT 7500 $ 160.00 i 1,125,000.00 MANHOLE STRUCTURES EACH 15 5 5,000.00 S 76000.00 PROJECT RESTORATION SQ FT 198000 1 5.00 i 990,000.00 PIPE BORING UN FT 100 $ 400.00 i 40,000.00 HOME PURCHASE(16485 SAGE WAY)&DEMOLITION 1 S 550,000.00 S 560,000.00 EASEMENTACQUIST)ON FROM SMSC OR 15825 WOODLAND(1400 x30) 42000 $ 10.00 S 420,000.00 RECONSTRUCTION OF 800 FEET OF SAGE WAY 1 8 500,000.00 i 50000000 20'WATERMAIN UN FT - 7500 5 80.00 i 600,000.00 20'GATE VALVE EACH 8 S 4,000.00 i 52,000.00 HYDRANT EACH 20 $ 6,000.00 $ 120,000.00 FITTINGS LB 90000 8 5.00 S 450,000.00 SUBTOTAL $ 6,164,698.00 CONTINGENCY(10%) S 518,450.00 ENGRNSP./LEGAL(25%) $ 6,291,125.60 TOTAL ESTIMATE S e,e72,075.00 -Aasumea(=amain and walsmwIn rout.from Stemmer Ridge Road and Belmont to Sag.Way through 14845 Sag.Way trough Spring Lake Park to CSAH 82(1.4 miles) Print Preview Page 1 of 1 ''�} %� Scott County, MN ^ **-----7-7 ` tY 1` F7' r ice - '- a. - ... `- t - '' . .! _ € ; c r,, .. ! ,• -4 ,..M'rr y5 d ; �. L- ' ''' `t .,----.,---- It ' '",-.::%_.„, —, '� �, 4 ,w• 4, '�"" �..-c _ A_ ,� ,. Nt sf r:�'+Ci - — __---"1 -•••,1;:—:. -s,�__=. ------..--,-4x6us • t { "- + to -r i1 `Q -1. ... Y -� `S _f„NI a t I ..y om' qY. - c-! { .f t - - Imo. N .k P 1 $/ jam _`""` t _ r . ---• -- Pr / r� r tt t , ,'' . 7 7.11 id V p _� I ;az ° Disdatiaer.Kap and parcel data are behaved to be accurate,but accuracy 6 netpuaraataed.Pubs Is nota legal Map Scale document sad should not ba sub tR uted fora bee aeard ppiats 4 survey,or tsar zoning vernestion. 1 tech=1060 feet 4/2/2015 http://gis.co.scoff.mn.us/ScottGIS2.0Private/WebForms/Print.aspx?img=http://gis.co.scott.... 4/28/2015 • • ENGINEERS ESTIMATE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE • Montag',"Routs to Ssrv1 Annsxat)on Area(CSAH 17) DESCRIPTOR UNIT OTT UHT-PRICE TOTAL PRICE • FORCEMANI PIPE LN FT 13912 1 160.00 1 2,096,000.00 • MANHOLE STRUCTURES EACH 30 1 6,000.00 1 199,900.00 • PROJECT RESTORATION 6Q FT 200000 1 5.00 3 1,400,000.50 PIPE BORING LN FT 100 $ 400.60 7 404.63 90 EASEMENT SQ FT 139920 $ 10.00 $ 1,799,200.00 20`WATERYLAfN UN FT 17092 $ 00.00 $ 1,110,300.00 20'GATE VALVE EACH 14 $ 4,000,00 $ 10,100.00 HYDRANT EACH 31 1 x000.00 1 199,000.00 FITTINGS LB 150000 $ 100 $ -700,100.00 SUBTOTAL $ 7,199,799-00 CONTINGENCY(10%) 0 710,230.00 ENCAHSPAEOAL(26%) { 1,799,01x99 TOTAL ESTIMATE 7 1,710,179.99 •Aasanas foramen and aratarrnaN rads from Sunset and PEAK 121a CSAR 17k.CSAFI 12 Is 613a6c lata boulevard 01/2 miss) •Assumes we addllorW 19 lsn Y CSAR 17 and 0ataerd Mame,llwwww arra may be 4aahwd •Aswrats 10 Net of ws,nM eadMeMon Wang mule -Howard Lake Road area am be 111•11.1114n.aux Ie wMMo6W ) • • • • • • • • • • • i ENO EST 4/21/1015 6l4 Print Preview Page 1 of 1 Scott County, MN Y r _ 7 1 I:_ w1 '-1 Y..-}a� _ j f !2 r /iii,o, — s �.' i f ii A '7` er . 4'-1 .� e - i sr •1'..4,.{r ` {J€ A , .4. As._ ,, - MIA t ,t._ -', '''tt " 1111p _ '"% ..iii-,-+ .' y Y"i 6+� �t �rlf • PS+TM L. a , %. L' .k'. q � Y t _. M f sk. x..)11r P �ilr } V - Kew ;11;% a a �° ' 1� om Fd r - . i •-•• .• S' 3' :F �^^��r t tln,.... l.s'_iC i.�l 10. _ v. C �M[,� rL. 1 t __err—P_.:. -Li.` __.___k .. c:_Alia !,....1--eT cc , -P ,-• B3 _,-.D.. a_ __..-.. —,-_ D•sclai^.75r:Map and parcel data are believed to be acct.rate b:Jt accuracy is nct guaranteed.This is no:a legal Map Scab document and should not be sui:stit:rted fora Etta search npp.aisal,survey,or for zar ng verification_ 1 inch=2121 feet 4/28/2015 http://gis.co.scott.inn.us/ScottGIS2.0Private/WebForms/Print.aspx?img=http://gis.co.scott.... 4/28/2015 Current and Future Residential Lot/Unit Supply i LOTS READILY AVAILABLE JANUARY 2015 .r © Existing platted residential lots = 230 l' • Estimated lots/units in review = 85 y 4 a Subtotal = 315 (7%of Total) 1*: FUTURE LOTS/UNITS WITHIN CITY `,," R. a Estimated within city's vacant land = 1,530(33%of Total) ,_3 i. (not including Campbell Lake area) ` >- FUTURE LOTS NEED SEWER EXTENSION 1,;,`. F • Estimated lots- Campbell Lake = 415 s� ,, ® Estimated lots within OAA = 2,315 . _,; o Subtotal = 2.730(60%of Total) r TOTAL PRIOR LAKE LOT/UNIT SUPPLY = 4,575 YEARS OF SUPPLY @ 250 UNITS/YEAR = 18.3 , ki Note: SMSC property is not included; if fully developed at R-1 density, then another 660 lots can be added (2.6 years supply) ,- • PRIOR LAKE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT-ACTUAL VS.ESTIMATED lI.""-vi'" -- Year � SF Units � Med. Density High Density I Total Units 2005 112 84 24 220 - 2006 84 82 154 320 2007 80 36 0 116 2008 65 19 0 84 2009 62 0 0 62 -.I Subtotal 403 221 178 802 t` Comp Plan 630 955 99 1,684 Unit Deficit (227) 79 (882) I ,, 2010 94 0 0 94 0- 2011 80 26 0 106 !r' 2012 122 52 0 174 i x: 2013 149 39 0 188 2014 118 8 0 126 Subtotal 563 125 0 688 Comp Plan 494 763 85 1,342 Unit Deficit 69 - (85) (6S4) TOTAL 966 346 178 1,490 COMP PLAN 1,124 1,718 184 3,026 UNIT DEFICIT (15S) (1,3721. (6) (1,536) RESIDENTIAL LOT SUPPLY __ ___I • , . tea. x =�►1�.._ December"I 2014 I E Ti • ..,. f .• -\_, ---7.- � ,\ *WWOFSHADYBEH f f) .ea tri II Mala- ) .., pr.e) Preliminary 82 ■ /EFFER3 tN7ND '� 'T ' {w _o . J Final 179 11lota.FInil'; j �l . t Final(Scattered) 353II :�►,m _� l't ' '` . Total �• _ x, ���. "a„ �t CARDINALADDRION H T :- cs4 � :t ti" I ��lots-Pralrminary j ..�. Rte.. '. L, a i t ypig M a..r•i i•_ i 11 `iii `�j°'t7�G"s'"'Ai f� wii` Fla. _ -Nog ;. �� 1 !7Ibts.PnlMdnny �� 42 Alb PLACE - �at teI ! 12 tata.PreWniauy �.. macaw.' 1 �� '`:3". -,e !t lob-Find mg, ENCLAVE ATCLEARYLAKE -na rou•Fhb,11 Ls r Pnin t(msry .t— V • FUTURERESIDENTIAL ,LOTAVAILABIIITY — • K r421December•d p / l 20141 ,....- iii Illrumtirs Pam POD 3 'pp3E........"...6 itaRiN .s..., ................... a it u Si u • \ gii —t— • 1!�i=r-.iTotal Lots/Unfs =1,945I 7,,r 'fWithin CITyanit$ wit High Density Ra+ide>ttlN .4 1 1 ,S 1 • ,915 untls �,�;_,0 tl�= • ( ' rlti _ VIERuNGBO1f1Y� _ "� ptire' Al10REN MIOOC3 e Q m u r t 16' a, fit! i �. , fir CAMPBELLLANEARSA F t ''t 4-.1. .�f •- �,�,' .' 411111111 k-. tie ,;rat, , ,,�� 3 z- esa—a�� ft joy . . ‘4.-•'-"o;:.-:•-••,1- ,i .!..1.41................,.,. .e.",1%.......szlc:;;;;".0;..–'•-Arri44.,..00 r2-67 ....A7-4, ,....._ Irflor. ii, ,,,.:_ff .: .am, .___,,airpi , iiii _..„ . : ______ . Housing Estimates 1: I ' IP ,-,,J I Ir.Low Density 1,940 •r-`Lx• J C Medium Densily 370 t ► _r •'•,..: Total • 2.315 l I ■ �� t■ 't S Today Larry and I spoke with Angela Torres and Lisa Barajas of the Metropolitan Council staff about the quandary we find ourselves in with respect to the Spring Lake Township Annexation Area. We explained that in 2003 the city and township revised an annexation agreement that originated in the 1970's.We identified the annexation area,the phasing and the sewer and water work done to date to extend sewer and water down Stemmer Ridge Road to serve the 2400 remaining acres.The street sewer and water were in the city'CIP for design and construction in 2014 and 2015.The city initiated the public improvement Project,conducted the public hearing,the project was approved and a consulting engineer was proposed.The SMSC purchased the Menden Property over which the road,sewer and water would be located.An agreement was negotiated with the SMSC through which they would provide the right of way,design and build the road,sewer and water and maintain the road in perpetuity. Because of concerns about proliferation of SMSC Trust Property in the community,the city council did not pass the agreement.A direction to take no action on the agreement and have the staff work with the SMSC to get the street, sewer and water extended also failed.A staff request to appoint a consulting engineer so the public improvement project could move forward also failed.So for all practical purposes it appears that the annexation area will not develop. Larry and i expressed concern that it is possible that the city will be unable to comply with its already approved comprehensive plan.We asked the Metropolitan Council Staff Members what would happen.The Metropolitan Council would become involved if a comprehensive plan amendment request was proposed or a new comprehensive plan was submitted if either proposal confirmed that the annexation area was no longer to be developed and alternatives to support forecasted growth were not included. if either of these actions took place the Metropolitan Council would find that the city's plans represents a significant departure from regional plans.They indicated that the Metropolitan Council has already made and paid for significant regional sewer capacity investments based upon the city's comprehensive plans.They also forecasted population increases based upon city projections and plans. The Metropolitan Council Staff would first try to work with the city.The annexation area could be kept in the plan and alternative plans for infrastructure extension worked on and developed over the next couple of years.Or the city could enter into an annexation agreement with another entity to use up the allocated sewer capacity.Or the city could, through redevelopment dramatically increase development densities to"make up"for the lost capacity. Assuming that the city chooses to do none of the above and submits either an amendment or an updated 2040 comprehensive plan,the Metropolitan Council would find that the plan would represent a departure from the Metropolitan Council's system plan and schedule a public hearing.This is like what happened with Lake Elmo.The finding was that the Metropolitan Council had made significant regional investments based on a request and commitment from the City that was going unused.Plans for supporting sewered development that any city in its comprehensive plan Is considered a contract with the Metropolitan Council—they will uphold their commitments to provide wastewater service and that the City will do their part to support development where regional investments have been made.The staff have provided me with a copy of the statute and a supreme court opinion on the topic. The conclusion of the Lake Elmo case is they reached a negotiated settlement mandated by the courts.It provided that Lake Elmo,within nine months had to amend their comprehensive plan to reflect the urban densities consistent with the Metropolitan Council's policies for development on regional wastewater service.Then every five years thereafter the city had to meet certain targets with respect to extending sewer or they would be severely fined by the Metropolitan Council. In this case the fines were just over$1.3 million for the first timeframe,which was twice ' Lake Elmo's annual budget at the time.The agreement did allow the Metropolitan Council to grant temporary relief from the fees to the City in the event of an economic slowdown. 2 Frank Boyles From: Barajas, Lisa <Lisa.Barajas@metc.state.mn.us> Sent: Friday,April 10,2015 12:13 PM To: Frank Boyles;Torres,Angela Cc: Larry Poppler Subject: RE:INTERVIEW WITH METROPOLITAN COUNCIL STAFF Attachments: MinnStat 473 175.pdf;LakeElmovMetropolitanCouncil.pdf Frank, We are happy to help.I've included edits(in this color blue)directly in your text below that are really more clarification than anything. I think you've really captured the large issues quite well. In addition, I've included the following items that we had discussed: • The statute regarding the Metropolitan Council's authority to require a community to modify its plan is Minn. Stat.473.175. I've highlighted pertinent text based on our discussion. • The case heard at the Minnesota Supreme Court:City of Lake Elmo v.Metropolitan Council,August 2004. • The penalty that the Council put in place to ensure that Lake Elmo followed through with building their portion of the wastewater system and allowing for development was called a Wastewater inefficiency Fee(WIF).The WIF was increased for each subsequent timeframe for any deficient development as follows: a t } • xpect• �'dr.. } i Sit F . •''. ConnectiOfl (REC) •T 1 F �' l a e jQ h iP4p reach` Households and• 4` Tih eFr ri -,s of �itRTC Pa�rment Date,, ` ampioment 2007-2010 _ $2,600 January 31,2011 515 2010-2015 $4,200 January 31,2016 1930 2015-2020 $5,200 January 31,2021 3120 2020-2025 $5,500 January 31,2026 4310 2025-2030 $5,700 January 31,2031 5500 Please let me know if you have any other questions or need additional information.I am more than happy to help! -Lisa LisaBeth Barajas Manager I Local Planning Assistance P.651 602 1895 I F.651.602.1674 From: Frank Boyles [mallto:FBoyles@CItyofPRIORLAKE.com] Sent:Thursday,April 09, 2015 6:35 PM To: Barajas, Lisa;Torres, Angela Cc: Larry Poppler Subject: INTERVIEW WITH METROPOLITAN COUNCIL STAFF This is what I put together to summarize our conversation the other day.Would you all please look at It and add,delete or modify to make it most comprehensive and accurate.Thanks for your help. 1 1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2014 473.175 473.175 REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE PLANS. Subdivision 1. For compatibility,conformity.The council shall review the comprehensive plans of local governmental units, prepared and submitted pursuant to sections 473.851 to 473.871,to determine their compatibility with each other and conformity with metropolitan system plans.The council shall review and comment on the apparent consistency of the comprehensive plans with adopted plans of the council. The council may require a local governmental unit to modify any comprehensive planor part thereof if, upon the adoption of findings and a resolution,the council concludes that the plan is more likely than not to have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system plans.'A local unit of government may challenge a council action under this subdivision by following the procedures set forth in section 473.866. Subd. 2. 120-day limit. Within 120 days following receipt of a comprehensive plan of a local gov- ernmental unit, unless a time extension is mutually agreed to, the council shall return to the local gov- ernmental unit a statement containing its comments and,by resolution,its decision,if any,to require mod- ifications to assure conformance with the metropolitan system plans. No action shall be taken by any local governmental unit to place any such comprehensive plan or part thereof into effect until the council has returned the statement to the unit and until the local governmental unit has incorporated any modifications in the plan required by a final decision,order,or judgment made pursuant to section 473.866.If within 120 days,unless a time extension is mutually agreed to,the council fails to complete its written statement the plans shall be deemed approved and may be placed into effect. Any amendment to a plan subsequent to the council's review shall be submitted to and acted upon by the council in the same manner as the original plan.The written statement of the council shall be filed with the plan of the local government unit at all places where the plan is required by law to be kept on file. Subd. 3. Enforcement to get conforming plan. If a local governmental unit fails to adopt a com- prehensive plan in accordance with sections 473.851 to 473.871 or if the council after a public hearing by resolution finds that a plan substantially departs from metropolitan system plans and that the local gov- ernmental unit has not adopted a plan with modifications required pursuant to section 473.866 within nine months following a final decision,order,or judgment made pursuant to section 473.866,the council may commence civil proceedings to enforce the provisions of sections 473.851 to 473.871 by appropriate legal action in the district court where the local governmental unit is located. History: 1975 c 13 s 19; 1976 c 127 s 14; 1977 c 347 s 68; 1993 c 186 s 10; 1Sp2003 c 16 s 6;2006 c194s1;2007c113s2 Copyright C 2014 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.Alt Rights Reserved. CITY OF LAKE ELMO v.METROPOLITAN COUNCIL The CITY OF LAKE ELMO,Appellant,v.METROPOLITAN COUNCIL,Respondent. No. AO3-458. —August 05, 4004 Heard,considered,and decided by the court en bane. Thomas F.Purse11,Forrest D.Nowlin,Lindquist&Vennum,PLLP,Minneapolis,MN,for Relator.Andrew D.Parker, Charles B.Holtman,Michael D.Christenson,Smith Parker,PLLP,Minneapolis,MN,for Respondent. OPINION The ALJ addressed two issues: (1)whether Lake This appeal arises out of the City of Lake Elmo's Elmo's comprehensive plan may have a substantial challenge to the Metropolitan Council's("Council")final impact on or contain a substantial departure from the decision,Resolution 2003-10,which requires Lake metropolitan system plans; and(2)whether the Council Elmo to conform its comprehensive land use plan possessed the statutory authority to require ("comprehensive plan")to the Council's regional system modification of Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan in the plans("system plans"). See Metropolitan Council manner prescribed by Resolution 2002-30. On March Res.2003-10(April 7,2003)(hereinafter"Resolution 13,2003,the ALJ issued its report,findings of fact,and 2003-10"). The City of Lake Elmo argues that the conclusions of law,determining that the Council met its Council does not have the statutory authority to adopt burden of proof and showed by a preponderance of the Resolution 2003-10 and,therefore,the resolution is not evidence that Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan may binding upon it. The court of appeals affirmed the have both a substantial impact on and contain a Council's decision,holding that Lake Elmo's substantial departure from metropolitan system plans. comprehensive plan may have both a substantial impact The ALJ also concluded that the Council possessed the on and contain a substantial departure from the statutory authority to modify Lake Elmo's Council's system plans. City of Lake Elmo v.Metro. comprehensive plan. Following the ALJ's decision,the Council,674 N.W.2d 191, 198(Minn.App.2003). Council passed Resolution 2003-10,the Council's final Applying the relevant statutory provisions,the court decision. In that resolution,the Council adopted the also concluded that the Council had the statutory ALI's recommended decision in its entirety and decided authority to compel the City of Lake Elmo to modify its that Lake Elmo must modify its comprehensive plan as comprehensive plan. Id.We affirm. prescribed in its first resolution,Resolution 2002-30. Lake Elmo then sought review of the Council's final In February 2002,the City of Lake Elmo,appellant, decision from the court of appeals,which upheld the submitted its completed comprehensive plan to the Council's decision in all material respects. City of Lake Council,respondent,for review as required by Elmo v.Metro.Council,674 N.W.2d 191. We Minn.Stat.§ 473.858,subd. 1(2002). Lake Elmo's granted Lake Elmo's petition for review on February comprehensive plan proposed to restrict future 25,2004. development and maintain the rural character of the I. city. On September 11,2002,the Council adopted Metropolitan Resolution 2002-30(hereinafter Minnesota Statutes§ 473.866 sets forth the scope of Resolution 2002-30),the initial resolution in this review applicable to contested Council decisions. By matter. The Council found that Lake Elmo's reference,it incorporates Minn.Stat.§ 14.69(2002), comprehensive plan"may have a substantial impact on which states that a reviewing court may reverse or or contain a substantial departure from"the Council's modify an agency's decision"if the substantial rights of system plans. See Minn.Stat.§ 473.175,subd. 1 the petitioners may have been prejudiced'because the (2002). The resolution required Lake Elmo to make administrative decision was,among other things,in nine modifications to its comprehensive plan that would excess of statutory authority,unsupported by allow for continued population growth through the year substantial evidence,or arbitrary or capricious. 2040. Lake Elmo contested the resolution and Important to our review here,section 473.866 goes on requested a hearing before an administrative law judge to modify this traditional scope of review in two ways: ("ALI")pursuant to Minn.Stat§ 473.866(2004).1 The scope of review shall be that of section 14.69, provided that: (1)the court shall not give preference to CITY OF LAKE ELMO V METROPOLITAN COUNCIL either the administrative law judge's record and report (2002). These system plans must conform to the or the findings,conclusions and final decision of the Council's Regional Blueprint. Minn.Stat.§ 473.146. council,and(2)the decision of the court shall be based Each system plan must include forecasts of changes in upon a preponderance of the evidence* * *. population,households,employment,and land uses for First,the statute gives no preference to the fact-finder the metropolitan area. Id.Together,the Regional and,second,it adopts a preponderance of the evidence Blueprint and the system plans coordinate and steer the Council's plans for the seven county metropolitan area standard,rather than an"unsupported by substantial evidence"standard.& The preponderance of the over the next 40 years. evidence standard requires that to establish a fact,it Subsequent to the creation of the Council,the must be more probable that the fact exists than that the legislature enacted the Metropolitan Land Planning Act contrary exists. Netzer v.N.Pac.Ry.Co.,238 Minn. ("MLPA"),which increased coordination between local 416,425,57 N.W.2d 247,253(1953). If evidence of a governments and the Council. See Minn.Stat.§§ fact or issue is equally balanced,then that fact or issue 473.851-.871(2002). The MLPA clearly sets forth the has not been established by a preponderance of the policy and purposes supporting regional planning and evidence. Id.The preponderance of the evidence the legislative goal that the parts of the metropolitan standard is a higher standard than the substantial area work together for the benefit of the whole: evidence standard set forth in section 14.69,which is The legislature finds and declares that the local the typical evidentiary standard applied by appellate governmental units within the metropolitan area are courts when reviewing agency decisions? Therefore, interdependent,that the growth and patterns of in following the statutory dictates of section 473.866, urbanization within the area create the need for we will give no"preference" to either the ALPS report additional state,metropolitan and local public services or the Council's decision. Additionally,when and facilities and increase the danger of air and water determining whether Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan pollution and water shortages,and that developments may substantially depart from or substantially impact in one local governmental unit may affect the provision the Council's system plans,we will review the record of regional capital improvements for sewers, applying the preponderance of the evidence standard, transportation,airports,water supply,and regional and decide whether the evidence supports Resolution recreation open space. Since problems of urbanization 2003-10. and development transcend local governmental IL boundaries,there is a need for the adoption of We first address Lake Elmo's arguments challenging coordinated plans,programs and controls by all local the Council's statutory authority to require Lake Elmo governmental units and school districts in order to to modify its comprehensive plan. Specifically,Lake protect the health,safety and welfare of the residents of Elmo argues that the Council lacks the statutory the metropolitan area and to ensure coordinated, authority to"dictate"Lake Elmo's population density in orderly and economic development. the manner provided by Resolution 2003-10. Minn.Stat.§ 473.851. The Council was created by the legislature in 1967 to Under the MLPA,each local government must coordinate interdependent local governments in long- periodically prepare or amend its own comprehensive term development and to avoid sprawl within the Twin plan and submit it for review and comment by the Cities metropolitan area.t See City of Brooklyn Ctr.v. Council as well as by adjacent governmental units. Metro.Council,306 Minn.309,311,243 N.W.2d 102, Minn.Stat.44 473.858,subds. 1,2,473.864 subd.2. 105(1975),rev'd on other grounds,City of Shorewood The Council reviews the comprehensive plans of local v. Metro.Waste Control Com'n,533 N.W.2d 402 governmental units"to determine their compatibility (Minn.1995); Minn.Stat.§§ 473.123,473.851 (2002). with each other and conformity with metropolitan To facilitate the long-term planning process,state law system plans." Minn.Stat.§ 473.175,subd. 1 (2002). requires the Council to periodically prepare and adopt a If the Council finds that a local government's comprehensive development guide,commonly known as comprehensive plan"may have a substantial impact on the Regional Blueprint. Minn.Stat.§ 473.145(2002). or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan The Regional Blueprint consists of"a compilation of system plans,"it can,by resolution,require the local policy statements,goals,standards,programs,and maps government to modify its comprehensive plan. Ida prescribing guides for the orderly and economical Lake Elmo takes issue with the reach of the Council's development,public and private,of the metropolitan powers,specifically its requirement that it accommodate area." Id s In addition to the Regional Blueprint,the up to 9,350 sewered households at a minimum of 3 Council must also adopt"long-range comprehensive housing units per acre by 2040. Lake Elmo is a policy plan[s]"for airport,transportation,wastewater primarily rural city located about ten miles east of St. treatment,and park systems-the system plans. Minn Paul and has approximately 2,350 households and 7,000 Stat.§§ 473.146,subd. 1,473.851,473.852,subd.8. Page 2 of 7 CITY OF LAKE ELMO V METROPOLITAN COUNCIL residents. In Lake Elmo's view,control of a city's 473.175,subd. 1.To decide this issue an understanding population density,beyond any other factor,can affect of the framework within which regional planning the essential character of a community.Further,Lake occurs is necessary. Elmo believes that if the legislature wished to grant the In 1996,the Council produced the Regional Blueprint, Council such pervasive power over cities,it would have the then-current comprehensive development guide, expressly done so by statute.Because no statutory which forecasted population growth and related provision explicitly grants the Council authority to development in the metropolitan area based on order a city to reach"minimum density levels,"Lake historical trends,market forces,and an analysis of Elmo argues that the Council's practice of combining where regional urban infrastructure could be provided population forecasts with related system plans to dictate most cost-effectively. The Regional Blueprint divided housing densities is impermissible and infringes on Lake Elmo into three land classifications-urban,urban Lake Elmo's zoning authority in a manner unintended reserve,and permanent rural. "Urban"areas comprise by the legislature. lands either already developed or planned to be We conclude,however,that when viewed against the developed by 2020. "Urban reserve"areas comprise plain and unambiguous language of the statutes at lands that lie just beyond the border urban areas,which issue,Lake Elmo's argument is unpersuasive. The will be developed between 2020 and 2040. The third statutory scheme clearly gives such authority to the classification,"permanent rural,"includes lands that are Council. In addition to the express responsibility to not intended to be developed in the foreseeable future. guide"the orderly and economical development,public From the Regional Blueprint's growth forecasts and and private,of the metropolitan area,"several statutes land classifications,the Council was required,by expressly require the Council to devise extensive plans statute,to prepare system plans for its four systems,i.e., for the metropolitan area and expressly empower the wastewater treatment,transportation,airports,and Council to revise local comprehensive plans that are in parks. See Minn.Stat.4 473.146,subd. 1(2002). conflict with the Council's overarching plan. The wastewater treatment and transportation system Minn.Stat.44 +73.145,479.146,subd. 1; 473.175,subd. plans are the primary focus of Lake Elmo's appeal. 1,473.858,subd. 1.In short,the Council is required to The Water Resources Management Policy Plan predict population growth in its Regional Blueprint and ("WRMPP")and the Transportation Policy Plan in its system plans. Cities must conform their ("TPP")comprised the Council's then-current comprehensive plans to the Council's system plans,and wastewater treatment and transportation system plans. the Council may,by resolution,require modification of a Both system plans incorporated the Regional Blueprint city's comprehensive plan when it may have a into their infrastructure development forecasts. Taken substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure together,the Regional Blueprint,the WRMPP,and the from the Council's system plans. Id. TPP made dear the Council's expectations for Lake In this case,the Council decided that Lake Elmo's Elmo's population density growth and the resulting comprehensive plan will cause inefficient utilization of services to be provided. existing and planned metropolitan transportation and The WRMPP provided for the construction of a new sewer systems. After unsuccessfully attempting to regional wastewater interceptor to serve Lake Elmo persuade Lake Elmo to modify its comprehensive plan and surrounding communities on the bases that the through informal dialogue,which included three current interceptor serving the Lake Elmo area was alternative proposals,the Council adopted Resolution nearing full capacity and because the majority of Lake 2002-30,and finally Resolution 2003-10,concluding Elmo fell within the Regional Blueprint's urban and that Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan may have a urban reserve boundary.i The WRMPP projected substantial impact on or constitute a departure from the Lake Elmo to absorb a sewered population increase of Council's system plans and ordering Lake Elmo to up to 1,500 households and 1,000 employees by 2020. modify its comprehensive plan. Because we hold that Utilizing the WRMPP,projected population growth the Council has the statutory authority to adopt occurring in"urban"areas would bring Lake Elmo's resolutions,we turn to the second issue-whether the total population to approximately 12,500 by 2020,with Council's final decision,Resolution 2003-10,was development occurring at a minimum density of three supported by a preponderance of the evidence. units per acre in the urban areas. Incorporating the III goals and standards set forth in the Regional Blueprint, the WRMPP also calls for Lake Elmo to maintain an The second issue presented in this appeal concerns urban reserve area for further sewered development Lake Elmo's contention that the Council's resolution, between 2020 and 2040. Resolution 4004-so provides concluding that Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan may that urban reserve densities are not to exceed one unit have a substantial impact on or depart from the per 20 acres so that,when the land is needed, Council's system plans was not supported by a development can proceed quickly and efficiently.A preponderance of the evidence. See Minn.Stat.f Page S of 7 CITY OF LAKE ELMO V METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Resolution 4004-30 forecasted Lake Elmo's urban infrastructure and created a strong possibility that the reserve to grow over the next four decades by 7,850 Council may need to make duplicative plans and sewered households,with Lake Elmo's population investments in transportation and wastewater reaching approximately 31,600 by the year 2040. treatment infrastructure in other areas of the Finally,the Regional Blueprint provides that the metropolitan region to serve population growth that remaining Lake Elmo lands will be protected at rural would have otherwise settled in Lake Elmo.Therefore, development density,i.e.,one unit per 10 acres. the Council found that Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan In contrast to the Council's system plans,Lake Elmo may have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from the Council's system plans. sought to permanently limit development and maintain the rural character of Lake Elmo.Though Lake Elmo's Lake Elmo contested Resolution 4004-30 before an comprehensive plan mirrored the WRMPP projection ALJ,who reported extensive findings of fact and,like of growth to 12,600 residents by the year 9020,the city the Council,determined that the Lake Elmo's sought to develop low-density lots throughout Lake comprehensive plan may substantially impact and Elmo,rather than follow the Council's system plan of depart from the Council's system plans. The ALJ confining high-density acreage to a defined area. Lake found that,through 2020,the Council and Lake Elmo Elmo proposed to disperse development across all Lake proposed vastly different plans for Lake Elmo's Elmo land at a density of six units per 20 acres or 16 development. The ALJ cited the testimony of Charles units per 40 acres,with the undeveloped portion of the Dillerud,Lake Elmo's City Planner and Assistant City property placed in permanent easement for preservation Administrator,who highlighted the density disparities as open space. When compared with the Council's between the plans of the Council and Lake Elmo. system plans,Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan resulted Dillerud testified that the two plans differed as to urban in under-development within urban areas and over- density by a factor of six and that urban reserve development within urban reserve and permanent rural densities represented a"substantial difference"between areas. In the Council's view,if allowed to go into Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan and the Council's effect,Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan would exhaust system plans. Further,the ALJ agreed with Dillerud its supply of land by 2020 and severely limit,if not that Lake Elmo's use of individual sewer systems, effectively prohibit,additional population growth rather than the regional sewer system was an beyond the year 2020. Furthermore,Lake Elmo's "important distinction"between the two plans. comprehensive plan envisions future sewer service from Specifically,the ALJ stated that Lake Elmo's individual,on-site,sewage treatment systems,not the comprehensive plan"fails to provide for any of the metropolitan sewer system. 1,500 sewered households identified in the regional After the Council received Lake Elmo's comprehensive system plan for water resources management'and plan,it determined,in Resolution 2002-SO,that Lake instead envisions new households within Lake Elmo to Elmo must modify its comprehensive plan since it may be served by"individual sewage treatment systems have a substantial impact on and contain a substantial (ISTSs)or constructed wetlands wastewater treatment departure from the Council's system plans. In systems(CWWTS)."Based on these findings,the ALJ Resolution 2002-SO,the Council made fourteen factual determined that the differences between the two plans findings,which,among other things,stated that Lake were"certainly'considerable in extent'and Elmo's failure to plan for higher density development: constitute[d]a substantial departure within the 1)may result in underutilization of the three"principal meaning of the statute." arterial highways"that serve Lake Elmo; 2)may cause With respect to the substantial impact of Lake Elmo's other municipalities to absorb growth reasonably comprehensive plan on the Council's system plans,the expected to occur along transportation corridors; 3) ALJ cited the testimony of Bryce Pickart,the Assistant may cause longer and more expensive commutes using General Manager for Environmental Services for the more fuel and creating additional pollution; 4)may Council,and Natalio Diaz,the Director of Metropolitan force the region to make additional transportation Transit Services. Relying on their testimony,the All infrastructure investments to provide transportation found that the Council established that diverted growth access to the redirected population growth; 6)may from Lake Elmo will increase the burden on wastewater force the region to invest in new sewer infrastructure, treatment and transportation facilities in other parts of the metropolitan area. The AU found that expanding in addition to budgetary commitments already programmed for Lake Elmo,for other areas absorbing sewer services and highways in other parts of the redirected population growth; and 6)may affect how region will be more expensive than providing the same the Council"plans,builds and operates its metropolitan services in the Lake Elmo area. Based on the disposal system in the Region surrounding the City of preponderance of evidence presented at the contested Lake Elmo."The Council concluded that Lake Elmo's hearing,the AL1 concluded that Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan underutilized current and planned comprehensive plan may substantially impact the Council's system plans. Page 4 of 7 CITY OF LAKE ELMO V METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Subsequent to receiving the ALl's report,the Council growth will likely go elsewhere. This,according to rendered its final decision in Resolution 4003-10. In the testimony of multiple witnesses,will increase the this resolution,the Council adopted the ALPS report in cost of providing sewer and transportation its entirety,as well as the list of modifications it first infrastructure. Evidence showed that Lake Elmo's required of Lake Elmo in Resolution 200430. Lake neighbors have shouldered a far greater population Elmo challenged the Council's final decision in the court burden than Lake Elmo itself. From 1990-2000,Lake of appeals,which concluded that a preponderance of the Elmo's population grew by 16.3 percent. In the same evidence supported the Council's decision that Lake time period,nearby communities such as,Oakdale, Elmo's comprehensive plan may have a substantial Cottage Grove,and Woodbury,grew by 45,35,and 131 impact on and depart from the Council's system plans. percent respectively. Moreover,an additional$10 City of Lake Elmo,674 N.W.2d at 198. We agree. million to$40 million would be required if the Council It is plainly evident that Lake Elmo's comprehensive were to build the proposed Lake Elmo wastewater plan may contain a substantial departure from the interceptor elsewhere in the metropolitan area. Council's system plans.2 See Minn.Stat.§ 473.175, According to an analysis conducted by Bryce Pickart of subd. 1.By 2040,the Council has planned for Lake the Council,providing a sewer interceptor similar to the Elmo to reach a sewered population of over 9,000 proposed Lake Elmo interceptor would cost an households and approximately 91,600 residents. This additional$l0 million if located in the Mahtomedi, growth is to occur in stages and result in a small,yet Grant,and Dellwood area; $12 million more if built in relatively dense,portion of Lake Elmo bearing most of the Hugo,Lino Lakes,and Forest Lake area; and,$27- the population growth,thereby preserving large $40 million more if built in the Blaine,Ham Lake, sections of Lake Elmo as permanent rural areas. In Andover,and Ramsey area. Finally,Natalio Diaz contrast,Lake Elmo plans to develop at a moderate testified that Lake Elmo is situated a short distance density,which will exhaust its land supply by 2020 at a from St.Paul and is served by three major highways- population of 12,500 residents. Lake Elmo's Interstate 94,Interstate 694,and Highway 36-which comprehensive plan ignores the Council's desired currently have the capacity for additional traffic.t density levels and fails to preserve land for future The foregoing evidence supports the Council's decision development. Finally,Lake Elmo does not plan to that Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan may have a utilize the regional wastewater interceptor proposed for substantial impact on the metropolitan regional system the Lake Elmo vicinity. Instead,Lake Elmo plans to plans. The current and planned regional wastewater expand usage of individual sewer systems in direct treatment and transportation infrastructure can serve contradiction of the WRMPP. For the foregoing Lake Elmo and its projected growth through 2040. If reasons,we hold that there is a preponderance of Lake Elmo does not grow in the manner prescribed by evidence supporting the conclusion that Lake Elmo's the Council in Resolution 2005-10,the"coordinated, comprehensive plan may contain a substantial departure orderly and economic development"of the metropolitan from the Council's system plans. area will be adversely effected. Therefore,we hold The record further supports,by a preponderance of the that,by a preponderance of the evidence,Lake Elmo's evidence,the finding that Lake Elmo's comprehensive comprehensive plan may have both a substantial impact plan may have a substantial impact on the Council's on and a constitute substantial departure from the system plans. See Minn.Stat.§ 473.175,subd. 1. Council's system plans. Specifically,Lake Elmo's limited population would IV. cause inefficient underutilization of existing and planned transportation and sewer infrastructure. The Finally,Lake Elmo argues that Resolution 8003-10, which requires Lake Elmo to accommodate the number close proximity of Lake Limo to St.Paul,the availability of principal arterial roadways adjacent to of sewered households identified in the WRMPP, Lake Elmo,the potential for transit services to Lake creates a de facto obligation to build a"new sewer Elmo,and the availability of cost-effective wastewater system,"a directive prohibited by Minn.Stat.§ 473.871 treatment services,all point to Lake Elmo's suitability (4002). Lake Elmo bases its argument on section to absorb the inevitable population growth facing the 473.871,which states that"the council shall have no metropolitan area. According to the 1996 Regional authority under this chapter to require a local governmental unit to construct a new sewer system." Blueprint,by 2020,the metropolitan area must accommodate 630,000 new households and 650,000 new Minnesota Statutes§ 473.871,however,does not stand residents. Of this new growth,the Regional Blueprint alone. Section§ 115.01,subd. 18(2002)defines predicts that 110,000 new households will settle in the "sewer system"as: east metropolitan area,of which Lake Elmo is a part. pipelines or conduits,pumping stations,and force If Lake Elmo does not accept its fair share of mains,and all other constructions,devices,and metropolitan population growth,this population appliances appurtenant thereto,used for conducting Page 6 of 7 CITY OF LANE ELMO V METROPOLITAN COUNCIL sewage or industrial waste or other wastes to a point of This subdivision expressly empowers the Council to ultimate disposal. require cities to connect their sewer systems to the (Emphasis added.) In order for a collection of pipes, metropolitan disposal system pumps,and mains to constitute a sewer system,it must Harmonizing the three statutes and recognizing the carry the wastewater"to a point of ultimate disposal." Council's responsibility for long-range comprehensive" Id.Though the Council requires Lake Elmo to link to planning for the metropolitan area,we hold that the the metropolitan sewer system,it does not require Lake Council has the right to require Lake Elmo to connect Elmo to transport sewage to the ultimate point of to the regional sewer system and that such a disposal,the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment requirement does not violate section 473.871. To Plant located in St.Paul,Minnesota. See Minn.Stat. § interpret the statutes as Lake Elmo requests would 473.515,subd.3(2002). Therefore,although it is a cripple the Council's wastewater planning function. critical part of the regional plan,Lake Elmo's obligation Without the power to require connection to the to connect to the regional wastewater interceptor falls regional sewer system,the Council could not plan and short of what constitutes a complete sewer system,both build sewer infrastructure with the assurance that it in terms of the statute and common understanding. would be cost-effectively utilized and coordinated with See Minn.Stat.§ 115.01,subd. 18. overall regional development. See Minn.Stat.§ Further,and importantly,in 1975 the legislature also 476.851. passed into law Minn.Stat.§ 473.515,subd.s(2002), In summary,we hold that the Council possesses the which provides in relevant part that: statutory authority to require Lake Elmo to modify its The council may require any person or local comprehensive plan in the manner provided by government unit in the metropolitan area to provide for Resolution 2003-10; a preponderance of the evidence the discharge of its sewage,directly or indirectly,into demonstrates that Lake Elmo's comprehensive plan the metropolitan disposal system,or to connect any "may have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system plans"; disposal system or part thereof with the metropolitan disposal system wherever reasonable opportunity and that the Council has the authority to require Lake therefor[sic] is provided; " " ". Elmo to connect to the regional sewer system. Affirmed. FOOTNOTES f. Minnesota Statutes§ 473.866 limits the breadth of the administrative hearing,stating that the subject of the administrative hearing does not extend to the need for or the reasonableness of the metropolitan system plans. Further,the statute provides that at the conclusion of the administrative hearing,the AL1 issues a report,which constitutes a recommendation to the Council. The Council is not bound by the recommendation,but may adopt, reject,or modify the ALl's report to reach its final decision. Minn.Stat.§ 473.866. g. The Council argues that this language means that equal preference is to be given to both the ALl's record and report and the Council's findings,conclusions,and final decision,but does not"diminish[]the deference normally given to administrative agency decisions." While we recognize that appellate courts traditionally afford deference to fact-finders on questions of fact as appellate review does not typically lend itself to deciding facts de novo,we nevertheless respect the dear language of the statute and give no"preference"to either the ALJ's report or the Council's decision. A. In the context of a contested agency decision,the substantial evidence test is satisfied when the evidence, considered in its entirety,is: (1)such that a reasonable mind might accept it as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (5)more than"some evidence"; and(4)more than"any evidence." Reserve Mining Co.v.Herbst,256 N.W.2d 808,825(Minn.1977). I. The term"metropolitan area'is defined in Minn.Stat.§ 475.121,subd.2(2002)and,with the exception of three cities(Northfield,Hanover,and New Prague),consists of the following counties: Anoka,Carver,Dakota,Hennepin, Ramsey,Scott,and Washington. For the purposes of this case,the relevant comprehensive development guide is the December 1996 Regional Blueprint. We note that Minn.Stat.§ 479.175,subd. 1,states that"[t]he Council may require a local governmental unit to modify any comprehensive plan or part thereof which may have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system plans." Id.(emphasis added). Therefore,the plain language of the statute Page 6 of 7 CITY OF LANE ELMO V METROPOLITAN COUNCIL establishes that either a substantial impact on or a substantial departure from the Council's plan,triggers the Council's authority to require a locality to modify its plan. 1. The 1996 Regional Blueprint contains,among other things,a map that subdivides the metropolitan area into six land classifications. The land classifications chart planned expansion of metropolitan development for the foreseeable future. The map places the majority of Lake Elmo's land into the"urban"and"urban reserve"land classifications,signifying development prior to 2040. $. The Regional BIueprint specifies that urban reserve density must not exceed one unit per 40 acres,unless the housing development is clustered. Such clusters are considered temporary,"until full urbanization occurs around them." 9. Lake Elmo's city planner admitted as much when he testified that the two plans were"180 degrees"apart. I0. The record reflects that the average daily traffic on Interstate 94 near Lake Elmo is among the lowest volume of similar six lane roadways in the metropolitan area. That portion of Interstate 94 carries 79,000 vehicles a day, whereas Interstate s5W carries 171,000 cars per day north of Highway 62 and Interstate 994 carries 154,000 cars per day west of Highway 100. Further,a$55 million expansion project is currently planned for a segment of Interstate 94,which connects Lake Elmo to St.Paul. • • Page 7 of 7