DOCSLIB.ORG

Faribault County Comprehensive Land Use Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Faribault County Comprehensive Land Use Plan 2015 ‐ 2035 Faribault County Comprehensive Plan 2015 Adoption Date: ______________ Primary Point of Contact: Michele Stindtman Program Administrator, SWCD/Planning and Zoning Faribault County Ag. Center, 415 S. Grove St., Suite 8, Blue Earth, MN. (507) 526‐2388 [email protected] U6T Secondary Point of Contact: Byron Jost Community Development Director Region Nine Development Commission 10 Civic Center Plaza Mankato MN 56001 (507) 389‐8863 [email protected] U6T Prepared By Faribault County SWCD/ Planning and Zoning Department Faribault County Ag. Center, 415 S. Grove St., Suite 8, Blue Earth, MN With Assistance from: Region Nine Development Commission Community & Economic Development Department 10 Civic Center Plaza Mankato MN 56001 www.rndc.org6TU TTTaaabbbllleee ooofff CCCooonnnttteeennntttsss Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................... i 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 SECTIONS OF THIS PLAN ........................................................................................................... 11 1.2 THE PROCESS ................................................................................................................................ 12 1.2.1 Why Plan? ............................................................................................................................................ 12 1.2.2 Public Input ......................................................................................................................................... 12 1.2.3 Final Steps ............................................................................................................................................ 12 1.2.4 Planning Advisory Committee .................................................................................................... 13 1.3 FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES .................................................... 13 1.4 UPDATE PROCESS ........................................................................................................................ 13 1.5 COMMUNITIES OF FARIBAULT COUNTY ............................................................................... 13 2. COUNTY PROFILE ............................................................................................................................ 15 2.1 COUNTY OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................... 15 2.1.1 Location ................................................................................................................................................ 15 2.1.2 Topography ......................................................................................................................................... 18 2.1.3 Surface Water, Lakes, Rivers and Stream, Public Drainage and Watersheds ......... 18 2.1.4 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................ 23 2.1.5 Geology .................................................................................................................................................. 23 2.1.6 Soils ......................................................................................................................................................... 24 2.1.7 Climate .................................................................................................................................................. 24 2.2 COMMUNITY OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................... 25 2.2.1 City of Blue Earth .............................................................................................................................. 26 2.2.2 City of Bricelyn .................................................................................................................................. 27 2.2.3 City of Delavan ................................................................................................................................... 28 2.2.4 City of Easton ...................................................................................................................................... 29 2.2.5 City of Elmore ..................................................................................................................................... 30 2.2.6 City of Frost ......................................................................................................................................... 31 2.2.7 City of Kiester ..................................................................................................................................... 32 2.2.8 City of Minnesota Lake ................................................................................................................... 33 2.2.9 City of Walters .................................................................................................................................... 34 2.2.10 City of Wells ...................................................................................................................................... 35 2.2.11 City of Winnebago ......................................................................................................................... 36 2.3 BIBLOGRAPHY .............................................................................................................................. 37 3. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL FACILITIES .................................................................................... 39 3.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 39 3.2 HISTORICAL INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 39 3.2.1 Pre‐Settlement History .................................................................................................................. 39 3.2.2 Early History ....................................................................................................................................... 40 3.2.3 Incorporation of Townships ........................................................................................................ 40 i 3.2.4 Incorporation of Communities ................................................................................................... 45 3.2.5 1855 to 1900’s ................................................................................................................................... 48 3.2.6 1900’s to 1940’s ................................................................................................................................ 49 3.2.7 Post WWII to 1990’s ........................................................................................................................ 49 3.2.8 1990’s to Present Day ..................................................................................................................... 50 3.3 HISTORICAL FACILITIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PRESERVATION EFFORTS ........... 51 3.3.1 Existing Facilities .............................................................................................................................. 51 3.3.2 Existing Organizations ................................................................................................................... 54 3.3.3 Local Historic Preservation Efforts........................................................................................... 55 3.4 BIBLOGRAPHY .............................................................................................................................. 55 4. DEMOGRAPHICS and POPULATION TRENDS ........................................................................ 57 4.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 57 4.2 GENERAL POPULATION TRENDS ............................................................................................ 57 4.2.1 Changing Population ....................................................................................................................... 58 4.2.2 Aging Population and Age Dependency Ratio ...................................................................... 58 4.2.3 Population Projections ................................................................................................................... 60 4.2.4 Median Age .......................................................................................................................................... 61 4.2.5 Population of Townships .............................................................................................................. 62 4.2.6 Population of Communities .......................................................................................................... 63 4.2.7 Population in Households ............................................................................................................. 63 4.2.8 County Migration .............................................................................................................................. 63 4.2.9 Minority Population Trends
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Le Sueur River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report
    z c LeSueur River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report March 2012 Acknowledgements MPCA Watershed Report Development Team: Bryan Spindler, Pat Baskfield, Kelly O’Hara, Dan Helwig, Louise Hotka, Stephen Thompson, Tony Dingmann, Kim Laing, Bruce Monson and Kris Parson Contributors: Citizen Lake Monitoring Program volunteers Citizen Stream Monitoring Program Volunteers Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Department of Health Minnesota Department of Agriculture Minnesota State University, Mankato Water Resource Center Project dollars provided by the Clean Water Fund (from the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment). March 2012 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | www.pca.State.mn.us | 651-296-6300 Toll free 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.State.mn.us Document number: wq-ws3-07020011b Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. 1 I. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 II. The Watershed Monitoring Approach ........................................................................................................................... 3 Load monitoring network ......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Le Sueur River Watershed Minnesota River Basin
    Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Le Sueur River Watershed Minnesota River Basin Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Monitoring Section Lakes and Streams Monitoring Unit June 2010 Authors The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs Kelly O’Hara by using the Internet to distribute reports and information to wider audience. Visit our Web site Geographical Information System Mapping at: www.pca.state.mn.us/water/lakereport.html. Kris Parson MPCA reports are printed on 100% post-consumer recycled content paper manufactured without Editing chlorine or chlorine derivatives. Steve Heiskary Dana Vanderbosch Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Le Sueur River Watershed Minnesota River Basin Intensive Watershed Monitoring 2009 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Monitoring Section Lakes and Streams Monitoring Unit Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | www.pca.state.mn.us | 651-296-6300 Toll free 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.state.mn.us Document number: wq-ws3-07020011 Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 Intensive Watershed Monitoring Approach Introduction ........................................................ 1 Lake Monitoring Methods ....................................................................................................................... 2 Lake Mixing
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Mississippi River Basin Planning Scoping Document
    2001 Basin Plan Scoping Document Balmm Basin Alliance for the Lower Mississippi In Minnesota Lower Mississippi River Basin Planning Scoping Document June 2001 balmm Basin Alliance for the Lower Mississippi in Minnesota About BALMM A locally led alliance of land and water resource agencies has formed in order to coordinate efforts to protect and improve water quality in the Lower Mississippi River Basin. The Basin Alliance for the Lower Mississippi in Minnesota (BALMM) covers both the Lower Mississippi and Cedar River Basins, and includes a wide range of local, state and federal resource agencies. Members of the Alliance include Soil and Water Conservation District managers, county water planners, and regional staff of the Board of Soil and Water Resources, Pollution Control Agency, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, University of Minnesota Extension, Department of Natural Resources, Mississippi River Citizen Commission, the Southeastern Minnesota Water Resources Board, the Cannon River Watershed Partnership, and others. BALMM meetings are open to all interested individuals and organizations. Existing staff from county and state agencies provide administrative, logistical and planning support. These include: Kevin Scheidecker, Fillmore SWCD, Chair; Norman Senjem, MPCA-Rochester, Basin Coordinator; Clarence Anderson, Rice SWCD, Area 7 MASWCD Liaison; Bea Hoffmann, SE Minnesota Water Resources Board Liaison. This Basin Plan Scoping Document is the fruit of a year-long effort by participants in BALMM. Environmental Goals, Geographic Management Strategies and Land-Use Strategies were developed by either individual BALMM members or strategy teams. An effort was made to involve those who will implement the strategies in developing them.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridge 3130 MHPR No
    MHPR No. Original or Addendum No. Historic District Name: Minnesota Historic Property Record Background Data Form 1. Name of Property Historic name: SHPO inventory no.: Current name: 2. Location Street & number, intersection of feature carried and feature crossed, or general property location description: City or township: County: State: Zip code: Legal description: UTM Reference: Zone Easting Northing NAD 3. Description Style/form/structure/landscape type 4. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) status NRHP, individually listed or eligible : Date of designation: NRHP, in listed or eligible historic district: Date of designation: National Historic Landmark: Date of designation: 5. Previous Designation or Recordation Local designation program: Date of designation: Name of program: Name and location of repository: Other (e.g. HABS/HAER/HALS): Date of designation: Name of program: Name and location of repository: 6. Preparer’s Information Federal or State agency: Date MHPR prepared: Preparer’s name/title: Company/organization: Email address: Street & number: Telephone: City or township: State: Zip code: Page 1 of 2 MHPR No. Photographer’s name: Company/organization: Email address: Street & number: Telephone: City or township: State: Zip code: Page 2 of 2 Bridge 3130 MHPR No. FA-BET-003 I. Description A. Bridge’s Location and Setting Location Bridge 3130 carries Township Road 232 which runs north-south over Coon Creek in Blue Earth City Township. The bridge is located approximately one-half mile south of Blue Earth city limits in rural southwestern Faribault County. Township Road 232 is an extension of South Ramsey Street leading out of the city of Blue Earth and is also known as 385th Avenue outside the city limits.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. Location the County Limits of Faribault County, Minnesota Street & Number Not for Publication
    FHR-8-300 (11-78) United States Department of the Interior Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries complete applicable sections /'*) 1. Name (S-^A^ JJLX... sf. Historic Resources of FarFaribault County historic (Partial Inventory - Historic Properties) and/or common 2. Location The County Limits of Faribault County, Minnesota street & number not for publication city, town vicinity of congressional district Second state Minnesota code 22 county Faribault code 043 3. Classification Multiple Resources Category Ownership Status Present Use district public occupied agriculture museum building(s) private unoccupied commercial park structure both work in progress educational private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible entertainment religious object in process yes: restricted government scientific being considered yes: unrestricted industrial transportation no military other: 4. Owner of Property name Multiple Ownership - see inventory forms street & number city, town vicinity of state 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Recorders Office - Faribault County Courthouse street & number city, town Blue Earth state Minnesota 6. Representation in Existing Surveys title Statewide Survey of Historic has this property been determined elegible? yes no Resources date 1979 federal state county local depository for survey records Minnesota Historical Society - 240 Summit Ave.- Hill House Minnesota city, town St. Paul state APR 8198Q FARIBAULT COUNTY The basis of the survey is an inventory of structures which are indicative of various aspects of the county's history. Selection of structures for the inventory included both field reconnaissance or pre-identified sites and isolation of sites on a purely visual basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracing Sediment Sources with Meteoric 10Be: Linking Erosion And
    Tracing sediment sources with meteoric 10Be: Linking erosion and the hydrograph Final Report: submitted June 20, 2012 PI: Patrick Belmont Utah State University, Department of Watershed Sciences University of Minnesota, National Center for Earth-surface Dynamics Background and Motivation for the Study Sediment is a natural constituent of river ecosystems. Yet, in excess quantities sediment can severely degrade water quality and aquatic ecosystem health. This problem is especially common in rivers that drain agricultural landscapes (Trimble and Crosson, 2000; Montgomery, 2007). Currently, sediment is one of the leading causes of impairment in rivers of the US and globally (USEPA, 2011; Palmer et al., 2000). Despite extraordinary efforts, sediment remains one of the most difficult nonpoint-source pollutants to quantify at the watershed scale (Walling, 1983; Langland et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2011). Developing a predictive understanding of watershed sediment yield has proven especially difficult in low-relief landscapes. Challenges arise due to several common features of these landscapes, including a) source and sink areas are defined by very subtle topographic features that often cannot be detected even with relatively high resolution topography data (15 cm vertical uncertainty), b) humans have dramatically altered water and sediment routing processes, the effects of which are exceedingly difficult to capture in a conventional watershed hydrology/erosion model (Wilkinson and McElroy, 2007; Montgomery, 2007); and c) as sediment is routed through a river network it is actively exchanged between the channel and floodplain, a dynamic that is difficult to model at the channel network scale (Lauer and Parker, 2008). Thus, while models can be useful to understand sediment dynamics at the landscape scale and predict changes in sediment flux and water quality in response to management actions in a watershed, several key processes are difficult to constrain to a satisfactory degree.
    [Show full text]
  • By David L. Lorenz and Gregory A. Payne
    SELECTED DATA FOR STREAM SUBBASINS IN THE LE SUEUR RIVER BASIN, SOUTH-CENTRAL MINNESOTA By David L. Lorenz and Gregory A. Payne ABSTRACT This report presents selected data that describe the characteristics of stream basins upstream from selected points on streams in the Le Sueur River basin. The points on the streams include outlets of subbasins of about five square miles, sewage treatment plant outlets, and U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations in the basin. INTRODUCTION The Le Sueur River upstream from its confluence with the Blue Earth River drains an area of 1,110 mi (square miles). It is located in the counties of Blue Earth, Faribault, Freeborn, Le Sueur, Steele, and Waseca in south-central Minnesota. This report is one of several gazateers providing basin characteristics of streams in Minnesota. It provides selected data for subbasins larger thai about 5 mi , sewage-treatment-plant outlets, and U.S. Geological Survey (USG! streamflow-gaging stations located in the Le Sueur River basin. Methods USGS 7-1/2 minute series topographic maps were used as base maps to obtain the data presented in this report. Data were compiled with a geograph­ ic information system (CIS) and were stored in an Albers equal-area projec­ tion. Data-base functions and other capabilities of the CIS were used to aggregate the data, determine drainage area of the subbasins, and determine stream channel lengths. Elevation data for the streams were recorded at the point were topographic-contour lines interescted the stream traces. Points on the stream channel 10 percent and 85 percent of the stream-channel length from the basin outlet to the drainage divide were located by the CIS, and the elevations of these points were interpolated from the data recorded in the CIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction Description of the Study Area The Blue Earth River Watershed is one of twelve major watersheds located within the Minnesota River Basin. The Blue Earth River Watershed is located in south central Minnesota within Blue Earth, Cottonwood, Faribault, Freeborn, Jackson, Martin, and Watonwan counties and northern Iowa (Figure 1). The Blue Earth River Major Watershed area is a region of gently rolling ground moraine, with a total area of approximately 1,550 square miles or 992,034 acres. Of the 992,034 acres, 775,590 acres are located in Minnesota and 216,444 acres are located in Iowa. The Blue Earth River Watershed is located within the Western Corn Belt Plains Ecoregion, where agriculture is the predominate land use, including cultivation and feedlot operations. Urban land use areas include the cities of Blue Earth, Fairmont, Jackson, Mankato, Wells, and other smaller communities. The watershed is subdivided using topography and drainage features into 115 minor watersheds ranging in size from 2,197 acres to 30,584 acres with a mean size of approximately 8,626 acres. The Blue Earth River Major Watershed drainage network is defined by the Blue Earth River and its major tributaries: the East Branch of Blue Earth River, the West Branch of Blue Earth River, the Middle Branch of the Blue Earth River, Elm Creek, and Center Creek. Other smaller streams, public and private drainage systems, lakes, and wetlands complete the drainage network. The lakes and other wetlands within the Blue Earth River Watershed comprise about 3% of the watershed. The total length of the stream network is 1,178 miles of which 414 miles are intermittent streams and 764 miles are perennial streams.
    [Show full text]
  • R & R Hogs LLC Environmental Assessment Worksheet
    Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) R & R Hogs LLC Doc Type: Public Notice Public Comment Information EAW Public comment period begins: July 4, 2016 EAW Public comment period ends: August 3, 2016 Notice published in the EQB Monitor: July 4, 2016 Facility Specific Information Facility name and location: Facility contact: R & R Hogs Alan D. Larsen Faribault County Anez Consulting, Inc. Dunbar Township 1700 Technology Drive NE NW ¼ Section 4 Willmar, MN 56201 Township 104N Range 24 West Phone: 320-235-1970 Fax: 320-235-1986 Email;[email protected] MPCA Contact Information MPCA EAW contact person: MPCA Permit contact person: Laura Hysjulien Desiree Hohenstein Resource Management and Assistance Division Watershed Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55-55 St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 Phone: 651-757-2455 Phone: 651-757-2334 Fax: 651-297-2343 Fax: 651-297-2343 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Admin staff phone: 651-757-2100 General Information The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is distributing this Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for a 30-day review and comment period pursuant to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules. The MPCA uses the EAW and any comments received to evaluate the potential for significant environmental effects from the project and decide on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). An electronic version of the EAW is available on the MPCA Environmental Review webpage at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/oxpg691.
    [Show full text]
  • Blue Earth River Watershed
    Minnesota River Basin 2010 Progress Report Blue Earth River Watershed BLUE EARTH RIVER WATERSHED Part of the Greater Blue Earth River Basin, which also includes the Le Sueur River and Watonwan River watersheds, the Blue Earth River Watershed is characterized by a terrain of gently rolling prairie and glacial moraine with river valleys and ravines cut into the landscape. The Blue Earth River Watershed drains approximately 1,550 square miles or 992,034 acres with a total of 775,590 acres located in Minnesota and the rest in Iowa. Located in the intensive row-crop agriculture areas of south central Minnesota, this watershed carries one of the highest nutrient loads in the Minnesota River Basin. Major tributaries are the East, Middle and West branches, Elm and Center creeks along with smaller streams, public and private drainage systems, lakes and wetlands. Fairmont is the largest city in the Blue Earth River Watershed with part of the City of Mankato Monitoring the Blue Earth River flowing into the river as it meets the Minnesota River. 16. 15. BERBI Conservation 18. Blue Earth River Comprehensive Marketplace 17. Greater Blue Landing 19. Mankato Sibley Nutrient of MN Earth River Basin Parkway 20. Greater Blue Management Plan Initiative Earth River Basin Alliance (GBERBA) 14. Blue Earth River Basin 21. Mankato Initiative Wastewater (BERBI) Treatment Plant 22. Simply 13. BERBI Homemade Intake Initiative 12. Rural 1. Faribault SWCD Advantage Conservation Practices 11. Dutch Creek Farms 2. Small Community Stormwater 10. Elm Creek Project Restoration Project 3. Faribault SWCD Rain Barrel Program 9. Center & Lily Creek watersheds 7.
    [Show full text]
  • River Bank Erosion in the Minnesota River Valley A
    RIVER BANK EROSION IN THE MINNESOTA RIVER VALLEY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY ANDREW C KESSLER IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIERMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DR. SATISH C GUPTA DECEMBER 2015 © ANDREW C. KESSLER, 2015 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I gratefully acknowledge the assistance that was provided over the years in completing this research by Blue Earth County Environmental Services Staff especially Scott Salisbury and Professor Susan Galatowitsch of Fish, Wildlife and Conservation Biology for their insights about early survey data; Ryan Mattke and the staff at the University of Minnesota, John R. Borchert Map Library for their help with the historical aerial photographs; and Greg Spoden and Pete Boulay of the State Climatologist Office of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for sharing the long-term climatic data. In addition, I’d like to acknowledge help from Ashley Grundtner, Melinda Brown, David Thoma, and Kari Wolf with field work and manuscript reviews. The original 2009 Lidar scan was jointly funded by the Minnesota Corn and Soybean Research and Promotion Councils. Remaining research projects were partially supported with funds from the Minnesota Corn Research and Promotion Council. I’d also like to acknowledge the tireless work of my major adviser Dr. Satish Gupta whose guidance made this research possible. Finally, I would like to acknowledge my wife Andrea and our three daughters for supporting me through this endeavor. i ABSTRACT Sediments remain one of the major causes of water quality impairments in the United States. Although soil erosion from agricultural lands has been viewed as the major source of sediment to rivers and lakes, in many watersheds, river banks are also contributing a significant amount of sediments to surface waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction Description of the Study Area The Le Sueur River Major Watershed is one of the twelve major watersheds of the Minnesota River Basin. It is located in south central Minnesota within Blue Earth, Faribault, Freeborn, Le Sueur, Steele, and Waseca counties (Figure 1). Predominate land use within the watershed is agriculture including cultivation and feedlot operations. Urban land use areas include the cities of Eagle Lake, Janesville, Mankato, Mapleton, New Richland, Waseca, Wells, Winnebago, and other smaller communities. The Le Sueur River Major Watershed area is a region of gently rolling ground moraine, with a total area of approximately 1,112 square miles or 711,838 acres. The watershed is subdivided using topography and drainage features into 86 minor watersheds ranging in size from 1,381 acres to 19,978 acres with a mean size of approximately 8,277 acres. The Le Sueur River Major Watershed drainage network is defined by the Le Sueur River and its major tributaries: the Maple River, and the Big Cobb River. Other smaller streams, public and private drainage systems, lakes, and wetlands complete the drainage network. The drainage pattern of the Le Sueur River Watershed is defined by the Le Sueur River which drains from the southeast along the edge of the moranic belt located in the east and north, the Maple River and the Big Cobb River which drain from the south to reach the river’s confluence with the Le Sueur River near the western edge of the watershed. The lakes and other wetlands within the Le Sueur comprise about 5% of the watershed.
    [Show full text]