THE AIRPORT DRUM CONTINUES TO BEAT!

Airport annexation was once again on the Agenda.

                                   


     Gary Schmidt, Director of Reliever Airports for the Metropolitan

Airport Commission, was present at the January 14, 2019, Town

Board meeting.

     In late December a letter was submitted to Eureka Township

requesting the Eureka Town Board to consider joining the

Airport Commission in a petition for an orderly annexation

of portions of the Airlake Airport.

     In a past visit, representatives from MAC attempted to work

out an incentive of possibly paving Highview or portions of 225th

Street. However, Mr. Schmidt stated there are Federal regulations

(Revenue Diversion) that prohibit this.

     Mr. Schmidt spoke with Dakota County when there was 

consideration of a potential road swap. Dakota County would

take over 225th Street. If MAC were to pave a portion of 225th

street, Hamburg to Cedar Avenue, would Dakota County

consider paving portions of Highview Avenue in return.

The issue for Dakota County is that their road project will

not take place for 7 to 8 years. This is too far out for that type

of negotiation.

     Another issue discussed is the potential parking of rail

cars in Eureka which is also an issue in Lakeville.  Mr. Schmidt

believes the MAC has an area to provide rail parking. He is

hoping Eureka can join MAC in an orderly annexation of

portions of the airport property to help resolve the rail storage issue.

     The property requested to be annexed is the airport property

bounded by 225th Street on the South, Highview Avenue on the

West and Cedar Avenue on the East.

     Mr. Schmidt stated they have had discussions with Progressive

Rail and have a parcel layout set aside that they believe

Progressive Rail will agree to. Progressive Rail and MAC

are now in the process of working out the details of how the

lease arrangements are handled.

     Gary Schmidt stated  MAC does not have a guarantee

or anything in writing from Lakeville. However, Lakeville

does have an interest in bringing a road across the MAC

property which is an incentive for Lakeville to partner

in negotiations. All parties need to work together.

     MAC will assure an earnest agreement. Mr. Schmidt

stated "Our request to Eureka is to agree to enter into

negotiations toward an orderly annexation of the Airlake 

Airport into the City of Lakeville."

    A motion was made to continue negotiations with MAC

and engage Lakeville in a 3 way conversation in pursuing

the avenue of an orderly annexation of the Airlake airport 

into the City of Lakeville.

     The motion carried.

COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSIDERTATION MOVES AHEAD, BUT NOT WITH FULL STEAM!

     The Commercial/Industrial "work group" came before the

Eureka Town Board at the January 14, 2019, meeting

to request the Town Board's approval to engage the Planning

firm, TKDA, to move forward in exploring C/I zoning in the 

Township.
                                                                

   Supervisor Barfknecht suggested this is an issue that should

be addressed at the Annual Meeting. She asked many questions that 

a business person would ask before a project of this scope

would be considered.

     Supervisor Palmquist, a business man, discussed how he

approaches business decisions that are costly and will affect

many property owners.  He suggested a feasibility study. 

Supervisor Murphy, agreed.

     A robust discussion took place with angry voices and 

shouting from 3 members of the "work group." While

trying to "bully" the Board (my opinion), Mr. Hansen

stated he was becoming "irritated." He indicated that

he was almost ready to take his ball and bat and go home.

Butch stated, "Real close to being so frustrated that I

am going to do what everyone else has done and

say figure it out for your own."

     Wendy Wulff, the District 16 Representative of the

MET Council, Vice Chair of the Environment

Committee  and the Community Development Committee,

was present in the audience. Chair Murphy asked her to 

speak.

     Ms. Wulff commented on a statement from Al Novacek

that if the Township does not connect to the sewer system, 

the Township can do whatever they want. Ms. Wulff

stated this is not quite accurate. IF zoning is changed, the

Comp Plan needs to be changed so the zoning is in

agreement. Cannot do one without the other.

     The Comp Plan change would have to come to the

MET Council and approval would depend upon the degree of 

what the Township is doing.

     If the zoning is low intensity as an Ag plus sort of use,

it would probably be less controversial.  If it has a large

traffic volume or large volumes of water, it would be more

challenging and it also depends on the scope.

     She could not predict the MET Council's decision one

way or the other. She also stated the MET Council has not

heard anything regarding the scope of issues and magnitude

Eureka Township is looking at. There is always room for

informal discussions; however, there is no binding action

until a formal request is received by the MET Council.

     She stated a typical urban community has mixed uses 

in a zoning area. The Comp Plan consists of what are the

uses and what % of the area is going to follow under

what use. She has never heard of one that is residential

and Commercial/Industrial. (A use being considered

by the "work group.")

     After further discussion which included a few misstruths
and habitual absurdities by the "work group," a motion
was made to accept the TKDA proposal as submitted,
which would engage a TKDA Planner to complete Tasks 1and 2.
The cost to the Township would be around $2,760.00.
Tasks 3 and 4 will be reviewed by the Board after completion
of Task1and 2 to determine if the Township should move forward.

Motion carried. (Hopefully there will be open houses
to obtain citizen input as the process moves forward).

     Compensation is calculated at the rate of $138.51

per hour with a total not to exceed the amount of $11,000.

for all four Tasks. (Keep in mind, any additional

services required would be an amendment to the TDKA

contract. There could be costs to the Township to installing

independent water and sewer services or any other site costs

such as road infrastructure or storm water management. Future
Board meetings with MET Council, mileage charges etc.

Only to name a few possible expenses.)

TASK 1 and TASK 2 consist of the following:
                                 
                              CONSULTING SERVICES

TASK 1 * Prepare Commercial Uses Concept Plan [Estimated
consulting time: 10 hours]

Prepare a simple concept plan that identifies the location and extent
of commercial and industrial uses proposed for addition to Eureka
Township.

Consultant Responsibilities:

     *  Review location, type, and extent of existing commercial uses
         in Eureka Township.

     *  Review four commercial districts drafted by the work group
         and analyze for land use compatibility and conflicts. Consider
         if four districts are needed or if they might be consolidated
         into fewer districts. Prepare memo to MUZ work group with
         analysis and recommendations. (Eureka Township Mixed Use
         Zoning work group).

     *  Prepare draft map of proposed commercial areas in consultation
         with MUZ work group.

     *  Meet with Commercial Zoning work group to review draft map
         and commercial districts. Revise per meeting discussion.

     *  Prepare memo for Town Board describing the proposed
         commercial districts  and land use map (Commercial
         Areas Concept Plan).

     *  Attend one meeting with Town Board to discuss proposed
         districts and land use map. Seek approval to bring Commercial
         Areas Concept Plan to Metropolitan Council staff for informal
         review and discussion.

Client Responsibilities:

     *  Provide all relevant background materials on proposed
         commercial districts and locations.

     *  Review draft Map of commercial areas and provide feedback
         to Consultant.

     *  Review draft commercial districts and provide feedback to
         Consultant.

     *  Meet with Consultant to review and refine Commercial
         Area Concept Plan, for anticipated discussion with staff
         from the Metropolitan Council.

TASK 2 * Review Commercial Areas Concept Plan with
Metropolitan Council and Identify Steps for Comprehensive
Plan Amendment [Estimated consulting  time: 10 hours]

Discuss Concept Plan with Metropolitan Council Staff and
determine what additional information is required to introduce
it as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, and the
chances of Metropolitan Council approval.

Consultant responsibilities:

     * Arrange meeting with Metropolitan Council staff and send
        Commercial Areas Concept Plan for their review in advance
        of meeting.

     * Attend one meeting with Metropolitan Council staff to discuss
        Concept Plan, potential to advance it through a Comprehensive
        Plan Amendment, what would be required, and its chances
        of approval.

     * Prepare memo for Town Board summarizing the meeting with
        Metropolitan Council staff. Send to the Town Board for
        consideration of next steps and if they wish to invite
        Metropolitan staff to meet with the Board.

     * At direction of Town Board, determine if Township will submit
        an application to amend its Comprehensive Plan. If yes,
        proceed to Task 3.

Client Responsibilities:

     *  Have Town Board representative attend first meeting with
         Consultant and Metropolitan Council staff to discuss Concept
         Plan and next steps.

     *  Determine if Board will invite Metropolitan Council staff to
         Board meeting to discuss Concept Plan and potential
         Comprehensive Plan amendment and attend such meeting
         if held.

     *  Decide if Township wishes to formally prepare an application
         to the Metropolitan Council to amend its Comprehensive Plan.

(Information taken from the January 14, 2019, Township meeting
and the January 3, 2019, proposal submitted by Merritt Clap-Smith,
Planning Group Manager, and Dennis M. Postler, Vice President,
Municipal Services, TKDA).
       

   
     
         
       

     

   

ANOTHER SCOOP FOR THE PALATE!

A Concerned Eureka Citizen Weighs In On Commercial/Industrial 

     A Eureka citizen who is a practicing property law lawyer

spoke at the January 14, 2019, Town Board meeting during the

Public Comment period of the agenda regarding the proposed

Commercial/Industrial zoning of the Township. The following
questions  are her comments:

                                       *******************
                                 
      I attended the open house hosted by the

"work group" (Butch Hansen, Mark Ceminsky, Al Novacek and
Ralph Fredlund) at the Eureka Town Hall.

I understood that a zoning change was going to be a long process

with multiple opportunities for public input. I understood one Eureka

citizen spoke in favor of the ability to use his land for Industrial/

Commercial uses, but while I was there, no one in the very full audience

of Eureka citizens seemed in favor of the idea. I was surprised to

see it show up on the Board's agenda so quickly. I hope before the

Board moves forward it will get answers to at least the following questions.

1. Which Eureka citizens are pushing for a change (and out of what

individual interest) and which Eureka citizens are opposed to change

(and out of what individual interest)?

     This transparency is important. It is important to know which citizens

are behind the change; what do they think they are going to benefit from 

it. Which citizens are against rezoning C/I and how do they think they

will be hurt?

     For citizens as a whole to evaluate if this is a good idea, the information

needs to be out there on the table.

2. What are the dollar and cents costs and benefits of a zoning change?

Will our tax burden or access to services go up or down?

     I am Not opposed to paying TKDA for a report submitted by 

a planner, particularly if it saves money for naught.

3. What are the quality of life costs and benefits of a zoning change?

Will the industrial sites cause pollution? Will the industrial sites

overload our roads? Will the MET Council's preconditions with respect 

to housing be good or bad for most of our citizens?

     It is not just C/I, it is also the dedication of, I think, 1,000 acres

for additional housing. Will this be good or bad for most of our

citizens?

4. Can we adequately police industrial zoning with the staff we have

(a Clerk and Deputy Clerk), and if not, what will be the cost 

of additional staff?

5. Do we have a mechanism for enforcing limits on industrial building

permits that do not involve lengthy law suits?
                                                                                                                                                   
 6. How lengthy and costly will be the administrative application

process required by the MET Council before it will approve

the change and what is the chance we will be successful?

     I have not done the admirable groundwork of the previous speaker (see

the previous blog) and do not know if it is possible to get MET Council

approval, but believe it is impossible to get the approval without a
SEISMIC shift in our land use on our northern border.

     I moved back to our family farm in Eureka. What will it do to our 

overall community if we meet the MET Council requirements? Zoning

changes are not inherently good or bad, the question for the

Board is, what serves the best interest of most of our citizens?

The citizens of the Township need more information and time, as well

as an opportunity for input before the Board can really answer the

question.

                                      **********************

(Once again, I appreciate the valuable and thought provoking

information and questions presented by this concerned and 

involved citizen. It is extremely important for citizens to be

involved in their local government and the decisions that

affect their community. STAY TUNED!)

Information was taken from the Jan. 14 CD and a copy of the

citizen's comments which was submitted to the Board.

HERE"S THE SCOOP!

Concerned citizens speak at the Town Board meeting.

                                      
     At the January14 Town Board meeting 2 very concerned, informed 

and conscientious citizens spoke during the Public Input portion

of the meeting offering their opinion and facts addressing the "work

group's" activities regarding the prospect of Commercial/Industrial

zoning in Eureka Township. 

     The following are comments from the first citizen who addressed

the "work group" activities. I will report the comments from the

2nd citizen in a blog to follow. I believe this is information the
Board and citizens in Eureka should take very seriously.

                                       *****************

     Statements made at the January 3, 2018,  C/I "work group" 

Open House should be troubling to residents. Butch Hansen 

made the statement "The work group does not need to post their 

meeting dates and times at all."


This is concerning when the results of this group may result
in expenditure of additional public money and tax dollars to
Eureka Citizens.

     The "work group" met with a TKDA planner a few weeks ago

and instructed her to obtain answers to the following questions:

     1. How to change the 2040 Comp Plan.

     2. How to make a formal request to the MET Council to connect

         to the interceptor line and who will pay for it.

     3. How to implement roads and curbs and who will pay for it.

     The above questions directly contradict what was asserted

multiple times at the Open House. Why were the residents who

attended the Open House told the "work group" had the answers.

Members of the "work group" stated they had the information,

which they did not, and the Township would be paying for it. 

(Butch Hansen also stated at the Open House "He 

could guarantee that he can get a letter from the

MET Council stating the Township can connect to

the interceptor). 
                                   
     The Township should not pay for the Planner inquiry; this is 

the responsibility of the developer.

     I met with Wendy Wulff, a MET Council

Board member, who stated the subject change to the 2040 Comp 

Plan would not be allowed. The MUSA line is not going to change

because there is no need to do so in the region. Any need for

change can be accomplished with open land in Lakeville.

     To change zoning from Agricultural to Commercial/Industrial

in Eureka Township would require an amendment to the 2040

Comp Plan submitted to and approved by the MET Council.

This is not going to happen.

     It was stated multiple times at the Open House that the C/I

zoning change was not something that was necessarily going to

happen, but was simply being explored to determine if the 

Township wanted to go in the direction. At the December

Town Board meeting, a member of the "work group" stated 

they were going to hold a meeting every week, faster than they

have in the past. 

     I was "quite surprised" when a member of

the "work group" stated to the Planner that they were moving

forward at an "aggressive rate." The Planner stated she was

NOT optimistic the MET Council would allow for sewer hookup.

     The Planner mentioned other options she would look at such as
independently owned and operated companies that would 

operate a sewer and water system. Without hesitation, a

"work group" member stated this was a better deal because it

would limit Commercial Development.

     However, this would result in tax payer dollars spent that is

apparently not needed and the 2040 Comp Plan amendment would

not be approved by the MET Council.

    The possibility of a privately run sewer and water system was

not discussed at the Open House because it was asserted

multiple times that permission would be given by the MET Council

when in fact this is not the case.

     I spoke with David Olson, the Commercial

and Economic Development Director for the City of Lakeville.

Mr. Olson stated 1) Lakeville has been approached by a few property

owners on the Eureka Township northern board to be annexed.

They were told "no." 2) The landowners who own the Menasha

building also own the large adjacent property that is in the City

Limits. This is why the City agreed to the annexation which

made sense for Lakeville. 3) Lakeville has plenty land to

develop and do not have a need, desire or infrastructure

to annex Eureka Township in the near future.

     I heard there is discussion regarding the possibility of
obtaining a grant for dollars to build a water tower. What
was not addressed is the operative cost to maintain a
water tower which the tax payers in Eureka Township would
get stuck with.

     Also, the DNR would have to approve permits by any private 

organization. This is not likely due to water issues Lakeville

ran into.

     I strongly recommend the Board deny approval of any
expenditures for a Planner or attorney. To further

this inquiry to do so would be a complete waste of tax

payer dollars.

     When there is opposition from many citizens and a

 potentially great cost to the tax payers in Eureka Township,

 the members of the Board should make decisions that are

 transparent and beneficial to the majority of the citizens rather

 than a few.
                                 ********************

(As a citizen in Eureka, I appreciate the efforts and time this citizen

engaged in. I know she attended many meetings in order to obtain

facts to present to the Board and the public which will allow them to

make an informed decision regarding the "work group's"

desire to aggressively pursue Commercial/Industrial zoning

in Eureka Township.)

The above information was obtained from the January 14, 2019,

meeting CD.

     

   .

     

    

FULL STEAM AHEAD ON C/I! ARE YOU BEING LEFT BEHIND?

I attended the C/I meeting on January 3, 2019. I and one other citizen were in the "audience." The meeting date was not apparent on the Township website.

The "work group" discussed the planner proposal. There were no public copies. Butch Hansen stated at one point that, "We don't have to post any of these meetings."

This group is going to ask the Board at its meeting on Monday, January 14, to select one of the three areas they have proposed for this development/use. They see the process as taking as little as six months to a year at the most. They are pushing for action now, perhaps starting in March or even sooner. (Planner proposal goes March to March.)

They are recommending the "northern corridor," land north of 225th across the entire Township, as their first choice. They have talked of first implementing the zoning/uses on Highview, north of 225th. Spot zoning issue?

The "work group's" idea is that the Township move ahead with this change NOW. No question as to whether this is the appropriate move now or not. "It's a done deal." Putting the cart before the horse...

No information on cost to the Township.

No information on what revenue this could realistically produce. Will it cost more than it brings in? Opinions are not the way for a municipality to plan for the future.

No mention of statutory requirements when a municipality changes to C/I in an area where residential use is allowed.

No organized report to the Board summarizing the findings upon which to base this important decision--because they have not addressed facts. "This makes sense to me that the area is here." "That's only 'common sense.'" And more unsubstantiated comments that are difficult to sit and listen to.

NO OPEN HOUSE scheduled with the answers to the questions the public raised at the first one. No open house scheduled for further input from the public ahead of moving forward on this. I don't believe that the "work group" majority even believes that the public input is of any real consequence. How to explain this disregard otherwise? (The "done deal" repeatedly mentioned at its meetings and at the Open House.)

Do you have something you would like the Board to listen to on this subject? At this point, it looks like your only options are public comment (3 minutes) at the next Board meeting, putting yourself on that agenda regarding this topic, which will allow you more time. or written comments to the Board.

Why hasn't the Board discussed the idea of updating the market study from the C/I Task Force?

Why hasn't the Board discussed the idea of doing a fiscal impact study (cost/benefit analysis)?

Has the Board determined if this area is expected to be serviced by sewer and water or is it going forward no matter what?

Has the Board revisited with the Met Council on this topic? No information has been given on this at any of its meetings. Hansen has claimed he "has (or can get) a letter from the Council saying they are going to let Eureka hookup to city services." Where's the follow-up?

Does the Board acknowledge the work that must be done in Phase II before moving forward?

Does the Board truly see this as a "done deal?" The wording of motions is critical.

Has the Board read the Task Force Report?

At the end of the "work group" meeting at which the planner was there earlier, Commission Chair Ralph Fredlund asked Mark Ceminsky if he had asked her all the questions which the "work group" has been compiling over their many meetings. Ceminsky's answer was along the lines of, "Well, I didn't want to bog her down." Why wouldn't it be more reasonable and thoughtful to put all these questions to her? They plan to ask the Board to move forward and yet they haven't even addressed the questions they themselves came up with. 

As one who spent hours and hours on this subject as a Task force member with the professional planner engaged at the start, not as an after-thought, it is dismaying to listen to this group (or at least its majority) and their "discussions." They promote that Eureka should move ahead (without any factual analysis), and they do not ever question IF Eureka should do this at this time. They are very sure that Eureka should do this. Ok, that could be the case under certain conditions, but 

                           WHERE. ARE. THE. FACTS?