Deb Sullivan editorial today re: Brown & Committee 1
August 13th, 2005
More about the I-35 proposed 11.5 million square foot commercial and industrial development, including this intersection of Co. Rd. 46 and Co. Rd. 1 (imagine Co. Rd. 1 with a five lane I-35 over pass and the traffic):
On Wednesday, I went to the Committee 1 meeting and was appalled, as usual. The draft AUAR was handed out, and I do have a copy for my reading pleasure. Paragraph 9 of the AUAR is disturbing because they anticipate the retroactive Comprehensive Plan changes necessary to make the Comprehensive Plan cover the zoning changes. And of course there is no “no-build” and cost info just isn’t there.
In today’s Northfield News:
Letters to the editor
Big Brother in the makingTo the editor:
At Wednesday’s county committee No. 1 meeting, Commissioner Jim Brown suddenly realized that the county master plan for the rezoned land on Interstate 35 could be jeopardized by the free market process. You see, there might be all sorts of businesses that want to locate in that area but they might not be the right type — regardless of how much money they might pay the landowners and bring the county. Or they may think that the perfect location for their business is in a completely different place than the master plan designation.So, after some discussion with the consultants, Brown decided that probably the best thing to do is get some new restrictive zoning language to “support” the master plan. This, of course, means the creation of yet another committee that would integrate the zoning language with the master plan by the Dec. 31 deadline — which will, of course, require a consultant to work with it for the attendant substantial fee.
Now, in the past, Brown has stated to numerous people that property owners should be able to do what they want with their property. And his votes and discussion on planning and zoning items certainly back that up. So, this turn-around is puzzling. After all, this type of zoning language would basically tell the landowners when they could sell and who they could sell to.
In other words, if you own land on County Road 1 and you get an incredible offer for your property but development has started on Highway 19, you have to wait until the development reaches you to act on it. Will the offer still be on the table by then? And, if you own property in an area designated for office space but you get a great offer from a retail chain, you just may have to turn it down. Or will the county take total control and require any business wishing to locate in that area to see planning and zoning before a landowner may be approached? And what about those landowners who find themselves in a “must-sell” situation before development gets to them? How about the people in the immediate path of the development who don’t want to sell? The ones who are connected to their land and community in ways Jim Brown can never understand?
To me, this is a huge loss of control for the property owner and puts Jim Brown (who has put himself in charge of this development) in the position of taking control out of every real property owner’s hands. As time goes on, the number of questions and issues grow instead of being remedied, and more money is being thrown at the project than the public was ever told to expect. Timelines before seeing substantial tax revenue are lengthening. And through it all, Jim Brown takes more and more control to try to ensure the success of his pet project. A very real Big Brother in the making.
Debra M. Sullivan
Bridgewater Township
Jim Brown displays ignorance or utter disregard for Zoning law
August 12th, 2005
In its suit against Rice County, Rice County Land Use Accountability, Inc., is asking for training for County Commissioners, County Planning Commissioners, and County staff. Last night’s meeting demonstrated why this is necessary. At the meeting, the Planning Commission voted to recommend to retroactively change the Comprehensive Plan so that the I-35 Zoning change fits under the plan — after all, zoning changes may only be made if they are consistent with the Comp Plan — and it isn’t now, by the County’s own admission.
Jim Brown, in a rambling whine, said that you change zoning first, then change the Comprehensive Plan to fit. I cannot believe… how does a guy like this get elected? Oh… that’s right… his publicly stated position during the campaign was that on the I-35 development he wanted to “go slow,” yup, that’s how he got elected, he said one thing and does another, in public tell them what they want to hear.
More on this meeting after I get an appeal draft done on that transmission case… Chuck Von Ruden had some excellent comments, Mary Herzog made my day with hers, it was a frustrating meeting, but the people turned out, the cities stood up, Dundas and Faribault’s mayors demonstrated leadership and represented their constituents well (Lee Lansing, where were you?), and Dixon Bond and Scott Davis were superb in stating their concerns. Bill Malecha testified — do they remember that the Forest Town Board was against rezoning? As usual, all the comments, and there were many last night, were against this change. The entire Planning Commission, with their unanimous vote, displayed disregard for the public and cities they are supposed to represent, whose interests they are supposed to protect.
Later…
Hot off the press, from the Faribault Daily News:
County changes plan to develop
Friday, August 12, 2005
By Thomas E. Hammell
Daily News Staff WriterFARIBAULT — The Rice County Planning and Zoning Commission approved Thursday three amendments to the county’s Strategic Development Plan at a public hearing.
The changes are intended to maintain constancy between the county’s comprehensive plan and the Rice County Zoning Ordinance.
The first change was in the wording of the plan to allow for transfer of development rights to occur within a township rather than within a section of a township — allowing the development rights to be transferred over a greater area. The second was to remove village growth zones.
The third and most controversial of the changes was to change the comprehensive plan to reflect zoning changes to land north of Faribault along the Interstate 35 corridor.
Nancy Marth of Erin Township was one of the first area residents to speak at the meeting and she brought up concerns with how the changes were made.
“I, for one, was under the impression that a comprehensive plan was the plan and the ordinance to follow would make that a reality,” she said.
Marth felt that citizens’ concerns weren’t being addressed.
“No wonder people feel that anything they say is a waste of time,” she said.
County Planning and Zoning Director Arlyn Grussing said the change in zoning along the I-35 corridor was likely what brought most residents to the meeting.
“That’s probably why most of the people showed up was for this item,” Grussing said.
Grussing said the reason for the zoning change for 1,200 acres near I-35 from agricultural to highway commercial was to prevent areas of the county from becoming bedroom communities.
“We do have a decreasing amount of tax base coming from commercial industrial,” Grussing said.
He also said that changing the strategic development plan fit the county’s goals in setting it.
“Our attorney said the rezoning was consistent with the plan,” Grussing said.
Carol Overland is the attorney for Rice County Land Use Accountability, a group that has sued the county over environmental issues in the past. Overland said the change in zoning was inconsistent with the plan — and the county’s desire to change it was an admission of that inconsistency.
“What that means is it’s not consistent now and when those changes are made it will be consistent,” she said.
Overland said the board was not representing the wishes of its constituents.
“You need to represent them, that’s what you’re here to do,” she said.
One resident, Dan Soderlund, said he was not in opposition to development philosophically but did raise some concerns about who would pay for it.
“My big concern is who’s going to be stuck with the bill on this thing,” he said.
— Thomas E. Hammell can be reached at 333-3128 or thammell@faribault.com.
And here’s a great letter in today’s Faribault Daily News:
Where are we?
>
8/12/2005 5:00:00 AMTo the editor:
With the recent shenanigans regarding the I-35 zoning fiasco, I found I have had to check my residency to verify I still live in the United States of America. I have spoken to numerous Rice County residents and have not found a single person who supports the I-35 industrial zone.
In addition, it appears the cities of Northfield and Faribault do not support the new commercial zone as it will pull potential corporations from their tax bases and established infrastructures. Who supports this?
I can’t find anyone — yet, the wheels of “progress” continue to grind forward. Although my family doesn’t live in the proposed zone, we live right across the street. I do not look forward to exchanging the beautiful view I currently enjoy with the eyesore of large buildings and the roar of trucks and traffic. I have spent thousands of dollars of my own money doing wetland restoration around Heath Creek at the outlet of Union Lake only to find that just downstream, this beautiful waterway will not be afforded the same protection. How long until the the police state arrives to forcibly remove my neighbors living in the zone through eminent domain? I guess a country that supports the destruction of human life in the womb certainly doesn’t care about the rights of anyone else.
Who is going to pay for this mess? You and I — the already heavily burdened taxpayers of Rice County. Now is the time to stand up against the zoning commisioners and hold them accountable. I hope to see all of my fellow disgruntled neighbors at the upcoming zoning hearing. Let’s restore the democracy that has been stripped from our hands.
Dan Soderlund
Northfield
Rice County Admits Inconsistency
August 5th, 2005
The Northfield News fit my Guest Column in this week:
Rice County Admits InconsistencyNotices went out late last week to landowners in the Interstate 35 rezoning area bounded by Minnesota Highway 19 on the north, and surrounding the Rice County Road 1 intersection in Forest Township.
The Rice County Planning Commission will “consider Amendments to the Rice County Comprehensive Plan. The three amendments are to maintain the consistency between the Rice County Comprehensive Plan and the Rice County Ordinance.” This will occur at a meeting of the Rice County Planning Commission at 7:30 p.m. Aug. 11. So the notice says.
This hearing notice is a tacit admission that the changes rammed through last December for the I-35 rezoning are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which is what citizens have been saying since that time. Yes, it’s good Rice County has finally figured out that they’re acting contrary to their Comprehensive Plan, but what does it mean? It means that they need to start over at the beginning and do it right. And doing it right means that this time they must incorporate the views of the various constituencies in the county who were shut out the first time around.
Where the Comprehensive Plan does not allow the zoning that the county wants, their efforts toward that end are not legitimate. The resolution for the I-35 zoning change is not worth the paper it’s written on, and the county must start from scratch. Another impact of this admission is that the argument that a “no build” analysis is not required — that the Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time the Alternative Urban Areawide Review was ordered is consistent with this change –that argument goes right out the window along with the illegitimate zoning resolution.
What does this mean for the citizens and governments of Rice County that were shut out of this process? Northfield, Dundas, Lonsdale, Faribault, are you paying attention? Now there’s another opportunity to stand up and be heard. Maybe, finally, your positions will be taken into account by the county commissioners who are supposed to represent them.
Maybe the county commissioners will stop putting special interests above their constituents’ interests and put the brakes on 11.5 million feet of commercial development that has not been proven needed by any market analysis.
Maybe the county commissioners will put the brakes on development that requires over $17 million dollars of water and sewer infrastructure, plus unknown millions in road and electric infrastructure. Maybe the county commissioners will put the brakes on promotion of development where it has not been determined who will pay these millions.
Maybe the county commissioners will put the brakes on talk of “incentives” to businesses in the form of tax cuts which will not enrich the county’s tax base and which instead cost the county much needed tax revenue.
Is it a coincidence that this notice comes out at the same time that attorneys representing the county are preparing answers to interrogatories, digging through Rice County files as they prepare to defend the county against land-use lawsuits? If that’s what it takes to hold the county accountable, citizens are ready.
It’s time to step back and look at Rice County’s needs and require that any development be independently sustainable, paid for by those causing the development, and not the overburdened residential taxpayers. 11.5 million square feet of commercial development does not belong at the intersection of County Road 1 and Interstate 35. It wasn’t anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan for a reason: This is not where Rice County should put its commercial development. It’s that simple.
— Carol Overland is an attorney and a Northfield business owner.
Rice County admits I-35 changes not within Comprehensive Plan
August 2nd, 2005
Frantic butt covering by Rice County about I-35 — too funny! Except that Rice County’s actions have an impact on people’s lives… this area is home for many people, and to put people through this is abusive policy. Does this look like the place for 11.5 million square feet of commercial development?
So what’s up? Rice County has sent out a notice that on August 11, 2005, at 7:30 p.m., there will be a hearing for comments regarding proposed changes in the Comprehensive Plan. After the fact, the County is trying to comply with basic land use principles, that you may only make zoning changes that are compatible with the Comprehensive Plan — the I-35 changes aren’t, so now they’re trying to change the Plan. Here’s part of what they’re wanting to change, the full notice should be published in the paper. Here’s the notice that a landowner received. View image
Item C: Add wording to the Comprehensive Plan to reflect the Zoning to
Highway Commercial for the area South of Highway 19 between County Road 46 and just South of County Road 1to I-35 and for the area North and South of County Road 1 between Baseline Road and I-35.* Add to page 50 a new paragraph following the second paragraph. “On page 18 of this document there was information as to how the tax base of Rice County was becoming more dependent on
residential development. Because Rice County desires to become a self -sustaining community it is essential that employment opportunities and non -residential development be a focus. An area of approximately 1100 acres is designated for commercial industrial development and will need to be properly planned to optimize development potential and benefit to Rice County. Creation of a Land Use Master Plan, an Alternative Urban Area Review (AUAR) process will be necessary to
guide the development. The AUAR will need to address more specifically the implementation of the Infrastructure Plan including Rice County Policy on improvements.* Change Map 3 Rice County Comprehensive Plan to include nonresidential land use designation for this area.
So not only is this a tacit admission by the County that its Comprehensive Plan does not allow for this type of land use, not only is it an admission that the AUAR does indeed require analysis of a “no-build” alternative because the Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time the AUAR was passed does not incorporate this type of development, it’s more fundamental — Rice County, in its rush to ram through this project, passed zoning changes that are not allowed under the Comprehensive Plan! Well, DUH, we’ve been telling them all this for how long?
Funny this should occur right when the County’s outhouse attorneys (not inhouse) on the MERA suit are digging through the County files working on our Discovery… $50 says they’re finding a few things that are “problematic.” The sad thing is that citizens have to go to this extent to get their government, which is supposed to represent their interests, to act legally.
Northfield City Council has work session on I-35
July 19th, 2005
Oh, there she goes again! This time it was the Northfield City Council, I’m trying to light a stick of dynamite and get someone to show up! If they are concerned, where are they? Not at Committee 1 meetings!
It’s one of those “little things,” but why on earth does the list of Rice County’s Committee 1 members show “Randy Peterson” as representing the City of Northfield? He doesn’t work there anymore, he supposedly is there for the meetings (I hadn’t seen him so thought he wasn’t, for sure he’s not contributing to the discussion), no one from the City of Northfield shows up for meetings, that tells me that the the City of Northfield doesn’t give a rhodent’s rump. Does anyone! Arrgh!
Let’s see, 11.5 million square feet of development in the middle of nowhere, in an area where the roads are crappy condition two lane with zero shoulder, no water, sewer or electrical infrastructure, and they’re talking about putting up showroom retail and big warehouses and after that tearing down the Co. Rd. 1 bridge and changing it into a five lane bridge? A FIVE LANE BRIDGE? HERE?
Northfield has a “work session” to talk about it. They pass out these huge packets that cost a few trees that don’t even have the relevant information — when Committee 1 started handing out the AUAR draft, well, that’s where the City’s info stopped, it says June 29 (agenda only), so let me see if I understand it, you’ve got folks who haven’t been to the meetings talking about something they know nothing about without the relevant documents that have been passed out at the last two meetings over the last month, things like the massive AUAR draft, the infrastructure update, the traffic report… the train’s rolling down the hill out of control… isn’t it about time somebody started at least designing the brakes, if not ripping up the tracks?
What can I say, during the meeting I got a lot of work done on the appeal brief.
Maybe it will look different in the morning… color me tired of going to pointless meetings!