Comprehensive Plan - 2005

I. Introduction

The Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act, passed by the State Legislature in 1976, requires that all cities, towns and counties within the seven county metropolitan area adopt a comprehensive plan. The intent of this act was to provide coordinated planning and growth staging of the Metropolitan systems: sewers, airports, highways and open space. The Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 requires communities to have their comprehensive plan updated and current by 1998. This document is the City of Grant's Comprehensive Plan, and it has been updated to reflect the incorporation of The Town of Grant as a City and to state its directions.

A. Purpose and Scope

Every community has a unique character that evolves over the years to represent important individual and societal values creating a way of life and a sense of community for its residents and adjacent neighbors. Unplanned and uncontrolled development threaten this character and quality of life by juxtaposing incompatible and inappropriate uses, leading to the creation of nuisance situations, and land use conflicts. Uncontrolled development can also lead to the rapid deterioration and loss of natural and cultural resources, the lowering of property values, and the risk of contaminating water supplies and other fragile environmental systems.

Local officials use a variety of tools and guide documents to direct the growth and development of the community in a manner that best represents the social values of the residents. The primary guide document is the comprehensive plan adopted by the local governing board and the legal basis for land use controls and the physical development of the City. It provides the community with a common vision and set of goals to make informed land use decisions and minimize land use conflicts. It addresses and establishes policy in the areas of land use, transportation, parks and open space, housing, natural and cultural resources, and public facilities.

Implementation of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan is achieved through the adoption of a variety of ordinances including: zoning, subdivision, shoreline and on-site septic treatment, the establishment of a Capital Improvements Program, and the continuing involvement of residents to ensure the Comprehensive Plan is current and frequently updated. These implementation tools provide detailed explanation and set forth regulations and standards to guide new development within the community.

This Comprehensive Plan was authored by the City of Grant Planning Commission and the Grant City Council to reflect recent history, current growth trends, and resident sentiments. The plan is organized into seven sections: introduction, background, inventory and analysis, issue/opportunity identification, goals and policies, comprehensive development plan, and implementation strategy. This Comprehensive Plan is the primary planning document for Grant and is intended to guide the general direction of growth and land use for the next ten years and beyond.

To further elaborate on the individual elements of the Comprehensive Plan the following text briefly describes each section.

The introduction provides a brief overview of the framework and organization of the plan and a discussion of the purpose and scope, the planning process, and regional setting in which the plan was conceived.

The background includes the regional setting and a brief history of Grant.

The inventory and analysis section contains the relevant background information and trends needed to complete the Comprehensive Plan. It is divided into four parts:

The goals and policy statement section establishes four generalized goals for guiding the future growth and development of the City. These generalized goals are refined into specific policy statements that provide detailed information about the community's desires in each of the relevant subparts.

The comprehensive development plan section establishes the physical relationships and explanations of land use designations evolving from the inventory and analysis and goals and policy sections. It is the interpretation of the goals and policy statements and the visual representation of them.

The implementation strategy section sets forth how the City intends to accomplish its desired future. Of primary importance are the zoning and subdivision ordinances, which establish the physical guidelines and regulations as to how the City will grow, develop, and prosper in the future. In addition, implementation of the comprehensive plan relies on the Capital Improvement Program and continued community involvement.

B. The Planning Process

The planning process is demonstrated in Figure 1 and begins with the synthesis of a shared community vision. This vision was achieved through a community survey conducted by the planning commission and is reproduced with results in Appendix A. This survey was followed by a complete inventory and analysis of existing base information to establish a point of reference for the Comprehensive Plan. The community survey results and the inventory and analysis data were combined to establish community goals and policies. These goals and policies were integrated into a comprehensive development plan providing the physical guide document. Next, the Comprehensive Plan was presented to the City Council for community approval and adoption. As part of this approval process the identification of implementation needs and ordinance revisions were addressed. Currently, the City of Grant is in the process of updating these implementation tools to align with the Comprehensive Plan and complete the needed framework to guide the future growth of the City. These ordinances will also undergo community action and approval. The final step in the comprehensive planning process is an ongoing re-evaluation of all components of the plan by local officials and residents to ensure the plan remains current and realistic.

Figure 1: the planning process ( not included, see official copy )

II. Background

A. Regional Setting

The City of Grant is located on the eastern fringe of the Twin Cities' urban core area and is within west central Washington County. Grant is bordered by Stillwater Township and the City of Stillwater to the east, Lake Elmo to the south, Willernie, Pine Springs, Mahtomedi, White Bear Township and Dellwood to the west and Hugo, Withrow (not shown on this map) and May Township to the north (Figure 2). The City is approximately 27 square miles with a little over 4,070 residents as of 1996. Grant's unique geographic location and commitment to rural residential lifestyles has made the community a popular residential community.

Fingure 2: Context Map ( Not included see official copy )

B. The History of Grant

Washington County was one of nine counties formed upon the separation of Minnesota Territory from Wisconsin. The Town of Grant was officially organized October 20, 1858 as a Congressional Township containing the normal six-mile by six-mile area with the first three supervisors and a clerk. It remained a township until November of 1996 when it became a city. The original area of The Town of Grant contained the current region plus the area up to the eastern border of the City of White Bear Lake.

In the summer of 1996, The Town of Grant successfully applied to be incorporated into a city. The Minnesota Municipal Council approved its application in early September, 1996. The purpose of this change was primarily to protect the rural nature of Grant. The Town Board dissolved after its last meeting in October and a City Council with four Council Members and a Mayor took office after the November, 1996 election.

The first school in Grant opened in 1856 and was followed by others as settlers arrived. These schools met in one-room buildings each operated by a separate school district and school board. The current City Hall is one of these school buildings. A couple of them are now homes. Many residents remember the red one room school that stood at the corner of Highway 96 and Jamaca and burned down many years ago. These school districts eventually consolidated into the Mahtomedi and Stillwater school districts. The Mahtomedi High and Middle Schools are located in Grant.

Except for Withrow, Grant was almost exclusively a farming community during its first century. However, its proximity to the Twin Cities and closeness to Highway 36 and Interstate Highway 694 made it attractive for development as home sites. Discounting the village of Withrow, the first platted subdivision was Hickory Park followed by Wake Robin Acres, platted as one acre lots in the early 1960's. Concern about potential pollution from septic systems caused the Town Board to change the minimum lot size standard from one to 2.5 acres in 1968. Later, the Metropolitan Council issued a directive that all future subdivisions in the rural townships within its jurisdiction have an average lot size of ten acres and a minimum lot size of five acres. The Grant Town Board adopted this directive in 1976. Since then, much of Grant has been developed into home sites. Only a few commercial farms now remain in Grant, but many small hobby farms, mostly for raising, training, and boarding horses replace them.

Grant has experienced only small amounts of commercial development. There are two commercial zones in Grant. The first commercial zone contains a farm supply store located at the corner of Highway 36 and Keats avenue. The other commercial zone is at the corner of Highways 17 and 36 where several small businesses operate. Several agricultural related businesses, two commercial apple orchards, a large nursery, and family farms sell to the public. (A more complete history of Grant is presented in Appendix B.)

III. Inventory and Analysis

A. Demographics

1. Population Statistics and Demographics

In developing community plans, demographics is one of the most important subjects for analysis. The ages of people who live in a community, the number of people who live in each household, people's incomes, and the community population trends and projections are important factors to the planning effort. By using statistical population data as a guide, in conjunction with careful consideration of such external conditions and pressures as economy and politics, projections can be made. Reliable projections of overall population growth, new housing demands, number of school-age children, etc. are critical to the planning process. Such projections will help determine policy in dealing with such issues as growth control, education facility requirements, street and utility improvements, and commercial growth.

As the growth potential of Grant is closely related to the demographics of neighboring areas, this analysis takes into consideration not only internal growth factors but also Washington County and Metro Area trends.

Population Statistics

Washington County is one of the fastest growing counties in the United States and the fastest growing county in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.The County's population increased 548% since 1940, with much of the growth occurring since 1960.

The population in Grant increased from 1,797 in 1970 to 3,083 in 1980 and 3,778 in 1990. September 1994 estimates by the Washington County Division of Planning and Public Affairs predict Grant populations will be 4,250 and 4,600 in the years 2000 and 2010 respectively. Data from the past two decades and the projections to the year 2010 show a slowed population growth for each decade. Meanwhile Washington County population data show substantially different percentage gains for the same four decades (Table 1).

Table 1: Grant/Washington County Growth

*Projected Growth **Based on Full Development

Clearly, detailed planning and projections for Grant cannot be based on simple extrapolations of data for Washington County as a whole.

Other aspects of Grant's population can be seen in the tables found on the following pages.

Table 2: Grant Race/Ethnicity 1990
 

Sources for the 'Population Statistics' tables: Grant Records, Washington County Department of Health, Environment and Land Management, Metropolitan Council.

Notes: Data may contain some variations but are based on the best information available at the time of printing.

2. Employment Characteristics

Table 3: Grant Household Composition

3. Housing

Table 4: Grant Housing Units/HouseholdsTable

                                                                                       1970         1980            1990

4. Grant Public School Enrollment

School enrollments are projected to rise over the next several years. Table 6 describes historical and projected school registration data. These data are for all attendees, not just Grant residents.

Table 6: Public School Registration Data

B. Natural Features

The underlying natural resources of any community provide the framework of opportunities and constraints available to land use development and community growth. Communities that work within and understand these opportunities and constraints are more successful in balancing residential growth and protecting critical natural and cultural resources.

Grant is a patchwork of geological diversity set on rolling glacial relief. The underlying soils are highly mixed dominated by glacial till and ice contact soils. These soils are the foundation for a variety of vegetation, including mixed hardwood forest and remnants of prairie. Many wetlands, streams, and lakes also occur within Grant adding to the natural diversity of the community and the necessity to protect fragile natural resources.

Soil characteristics, underlying geologic formations, existing vegetative patterns, surface water, and wetland areas become critical indicators of where and what type of land use development should occur and more importantly where this development should be located. The following section will discuss and inventory each of the significant natural resources within the City of Grant that shape the existing rural character of the community, indicate the most appropriate locations for agricultural and other land uses, provide recreation and scenic opportunities for the residents of Grant, and maintain important ecological functions such as clean water and wildlife habitat.

Topography

The total relief in Grant is approximately 180 feet. The highest point at 1,080 above sea level is located in the southwestern portion of Grant. The lowest point at 900 feet above sea level being on the east boundary where Brown's Creek runs into Stillwater Township. Figure 6 represents a generalized topographic map of Grant based on the USGS Quadrangle for the City and identifies significant stands of vegetation.

Slopes within Grant, while highly varied generally do not exceed 15%. The dominant slope class is from 0 to 6% with significant areas also ranging from 6 to 12%. Only one portion of the City southeast of Duluth Junction contains slopes in excess of 15% (Figure 7).

Geology

The bedrock formations on which the City of Grant rests are sedimentary rocks formed during the Early Paleozoic age (525 to 400 million years ago) and consist of sandstone and dolostone. These formations provide the basis for groundwater movement and location, as well as provide the foundation for the overlying topography. Much of the bedrock within Grant is buried beneath 50 to 200 feet of glacial sediments consisting of glacial tills and ice contact stratified deposits. These deposits are a direct result of the advance and retreat of the Superior Lobe Ice Sheet during the Late Wisconsin Glacial Event, 10,000 to 35,000 years ago. Moraine landscape formations are evident in the southern portion of the City and characterized by highly mixed unstratified soil deposits. Ice contact lake formations are characterized by flat surfaces bounded by steeper terrain along its margin demarcating the extent of the ice wall.

Together the study of surface and bedrock geology provides insight into the location and susceptibility of groundwater to contamination. While bedrock formations are buried beneath 50 to 200 feet of glacial sediments much of this soil is composed of sand and gravel deposits that provide little resistance to the downward movement of pollutants. In addition, sandstone is easily eroded by penetrating acidic rain providing avenues for contaminants to follow. For these reasons much of Grant is classified as being moderately or high moderately susceptible to groundwater contamination by the Minnesota Geological Survey. This suggests that contaminants may reach groundwater supplies and land use development should be cognizant of these risks. For more detailed information about the geology of Grant see the 'Geologic Atlas of Washington County, Minnesota.' (University of Minnesota - Minnesota Geological Survey)

Soils

Knowledge of soil characteristics guides the type and location of development. Three features addressed in this section include soil suitability for on-site septic systems, basements, and agricultural uses. Figure 8 shows soil suitability for on-site septic systems and Figure 9 illustrates building construction suitability for homes with basements. Some of the land within Grant poses severe to moderate limitations on the construction of on-site septic systems although the large lot size requirements minimize this problem. Great care should be undertaken when constructing these facilities to ensure that the future supply of groundwater is not contaminated. Soil suitability for the construction of basements is less severely constrained with Figure 9 indicating that much of the City only has moderate limitations. Finally, Figure 10 is a map of the prime agricultural soils for Grant that should aid in farmland preservation and home construction decisions.

Vegetation

Today, approximately 30% of the land area in the City is covered by forest, predominantly oak, but also some elm, ash and cottonwood stands. There are only vestiges of the original prairie remaining. Much of the original savanna is currently under cultivation or is in pasture. Some patches of conifer-bog and stands of maple-basswood exist. Figure 6 presented earlier in this Plan shows the stands of significant vegetation remaining in Grant.

Water Resources

Many lakes, ponds and wetlands are scattered throughout the City. These water resources are extremely valuable to the City and are important for their water holding and cleansing capacities. They are highly productive of fish and wildlife. According to the Metropolitan Council, Grant has 1,725 acres of wetlands and 1,028 acres of lakes and streams. The lower one-half of Brown's Creek is designated and managed by the Minnesota DNR as a trout stream. The DNR protected waters are listed below and are shown in Figure 11. ( Not included, see official copy )

Figure 6. Topography and Significant Vegetation Map( Not included, see official copy )

Figure 7. Slope Map( Not included, see official copy )

Figure 8. On Site Septic Soils Suitability Map( Not included, see official copy )

Figure 9. Basement Construction Suitability Map( Not included, see official copy )

Figure 10. Prime Agricultural Soils Map( Not included, see official copy )

Figure 11. DNR Protected Waters and Wetlands Map( Not included, see official copy )

Table 7

(Abstracted to include only Township 30, Range 21 and at least partially within Grant.)

Figure 12 (Available at the City office) shows those areas determined to be Flood Hazard Areas (subject to flooding during a 100 year storm). This map is the first effort by the Federal Government to inventory the flood hazard areas of the City and as such it is neither complete nor absolutely accurate. It is, however, a valuable first step toward identifying the flood hazard areas of the City and an important inventory for responsible land use planning. Historically, some houses were built on what is now categorized as a 100-year flood plain. Any further building in these areas is now prohibited. (Refer to Washington County Shoreland Development Ordinance adopted by reference.)

Four watersheds are located within Grant: the Rice Creek Watershed District, the Valley Branch Watershed District, the newly formed Brown's Creek Watershed District, and the Carnelian-Marine Watershed District (Figure 13). Most of Grant drains to the east and south to the St. Croix River through Brown's Creek Watershed. The western portion of the community drains to the north and west to the Mississippi River as part of the Rice Creek watershed. The southern portion of the community drains south-southeast through the Valley Branch Watershed.

The maintenance and protection of these wetlands and waterways is critical to the preservation of the high quality rural environment of Grant. Development is carefully regulated to prevent damage or reduction of water quality or of the holding and carrying capacities of the City's water features by the City Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances.

Figure 12( Not included, see official copy )

Figure 18 Water shed districts map ( Not included, see official copy )

Wildlife Habitat

No endangered or critical wildlife habitat is located in Grant as identified by the Department of Natural Resources biological survey, however many opportunities for locally important wildlife do exist. The state geological survey for Washington County identified the headwaters of Brown's Creek as nesting habitat for the Louisiana Waterthrush, a species of special concern in Minnesota. The diversity of open space, which includes areas of forest and prairie landscape, provides many opportunities for avian and mammalian species. These species consist of interior forest birds such as the scarlet tanager, open field species such as the meadowlark and intermediate species such as the eastern bluebird. In addition, the many lakes provide habitat for egrets and great blue herons as well as a variety of waterfowl. Grant is also home to a large population of white tail deer that find the edge of the forest and field as appropriate habitat. Finally, the close proximity to the St. Croix River also establishes Grant as an important connection to the migratory flyway and natural corridor presented by the river.

Existing Natural Resource Summary

Grant is situated to the east of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area and is essentially a rural gap in the otherwise urban continuum of Stillwater, Mahtomedi, Oakdale, North St. Paul, and Pine Springs. As a result of its natural amenities and of its proximity to the Metropolitan Center, Grant will continue to feel steady growth pressure. Sound planning and reasonable implementations are critical to the maintenance of the City's natural amenities and rural character.

New residential development should work within the opportunities of the existing landscape to provide maximum benefit to wildlife habitat diversity, preservation of existing vegetation, protection of fragile water resources and the enhancement of scenic vistas and open space.

C. Land Use

Grant is a rural city in the central part of Washington County, on the eastern edge of the Twin cities Metropolitan Area. It is about 27 square miles or (times 640) 17,280 acres.

As of 1996 Grant has a large percentage of non-farm, large-lot housing comprising 6,652 or 38.5% of the total 17,280 acres. The housing units tend to be scattered rather than grouped. Some smaller lot development was done prior to the present ordinance requiring ten-acre lot density being developed and enforced. Uses grandfathered in include lot sizes as small as one acre, a trailer park, and a drug rehabilitation center.

Development has been limited by the absence of sewer and water services, which is largely unfeasible due to both economic and geographic concerns. There are currently about 1,300 homes in Grant. If all lands in Grant were fully developed under our current ordinances, there would be a potential of approximately 2,033 homes. The existing land use map (Figure 14) and Tables 8 and 9 indicate that approximately 16.9 percent of Grant remains vacant. This includes land which has not been developed and is not being tilled or used for pasture. It also includes land that is subdivided for residential use but not yet built upon. Only approximately 65 platted vacant lots exist at this time, and nearly half of those are in relatively recent subdivisions. Vacant lots are rapidly absorbed, as indicated by the building permit data provided by Washington County.

The Grant Comprehensive Plan identified nearly two-thirds of the land area within the community as agricultural in 1982. Today less than one-third (31.0 percent) of the City falls within this category and most of these 5,355 acres are hobby farms with residential homesteads rather than traditional commercial agricultural operations. Larger blocks of land used for cultivation tend to be consistent with the areas identified as having prime agricultural soils. Many of the smaller parcels consist of hobby farms and pasture land. Six parcels, containing 259.6 acres, are registered in the Agricultural Preserve Program and 178 parcels, totaling 4,752.76 acres, are classified as Green Acres.

There is very limited commercial and industrial use, mainly along the Highway 36 corridor. All lots zoned general business are currently in use. Only 60 acres, less than 0.2% of the total area, are devoted to commercial use -- primarily a nursery and orchard located along TH-36. Commercial recreation -- riding stables and golf courses -- comprise about 440 acres or 2.6% of the City. Industrial use is limited to only 1% of the land area and involves mining operations, auto salvage yards, and a refuse facility. A small concentration of industrial businesses is also located near the intersection of TH-36 and Lake Elmo Avenue.

Grant has allowed development and uses that preserve its rural residential character and protect and enhance its natural resources and environment. Grant has provided commercial development at a level compatible with a rural unsewered policy, provided a no-frills level service, and maintained a road system complementary to its rural character.

Grant's goal, with respect to our valuable and diverse natural resources, has been to use land and related resources so these are undiminished for future generations. This requires wise choices and implementation of excellent management practices.
 

1970 through 1990. For specific zoning districts, permitted uses and dimensional standards, refer to Section 6 of the Grant Zoning Ordinance.

Land use within Grant can be currently broken down as follows:

Table 8: Land Use in Grant

Approximately 656 acres of public right-of-way or 3.8% of the total land area is distributed among the various land use categories.

figure 14 presentland use ( Not included, see official copy )

table 9 land use Changes ( Not included, see official copy )

Economic Characteristics and Trends for the City of Grant

Historical Perspective:

Grant's economy has shifted from a dependence on subsistence agriculture at the beginning of white settlement in the area to cash cropping and dairy farming through the early and mid 1900's. While agriculture is still a significant part of the Grant economic activity, the number of commercial agriculture enterprises is declining and they are changing character. The larger crop and dairy farms are giving way to residential development, horse farms, hobby farms, and some specialty and truck farm uses. It is expected that this trend will continue, and probably accelerate, over the next twenty years due to the rapid rise in real estate values in Grant.

Presently, traditional cash cropping and dairy cannot support land at current and projected real estate values. Therefore, if commercial agriculture is to continue in Grant, it will be of a significantly different type than that which the community has seen since the mid-1900's. The possible commercial agricultural uses include truck and specialty farms, Community Supported Agriculture farms, greenhouse operations, orchards, nurseries, pick your own farms, and horse boarding operations. However, for any of these agriculture enterprises to succeed they will need to be able to return a profit based on land valued at residential real estate prices. This will definitely be a challenge. Therefore, it is likely to expect that current trends will continue and that most current commercial farms will be converted into residential or hobby farm uses in the near term.

In 1982, the date of adoption of the previous Comprehensive Plan, agriculture accounted for 65 percent of the assessed acreage of Grant. As of 1996, agricultural land only represented 31 percent of Grant's total assessed acreage. This represents over a 50 percent decline in agricultural lands in 13 years, from 11,766 (65%) acres in 1982 to 5,355 (31%). At this rate the average conversion has been 493 acres per year. At the adoption of the last Comprehensive Plan (1982) the rate of conversion was 236 acres per year. This represents more than a doubling in the rate of conversion in 15 years.

Assuming that the current rate of conversion continues, though it is arguably more likely to increase, all of Grant's agricultural lands could disappear within eleven years which is half way through the scope of this current Comprehensive Plan. While the implications of this will probably not significantly impact Grant economically within the near term, because few residents earn any or all of their income directly or indirectly from local agriculture (see Citizen's Survey questions 14, 16 and 18A), this trend will have its profoundest impact upon residents' perceptions of Grant's rural character. It is also possible that it may have a negative impact on the value of real estate in Grant, if outsiders feel that Grant has lost rural character.

Given the desire of most Grant residents to preserve rural character and the possibility that most of the remaining agricultural land could be lost to residential uses within the time frame of this Comprehensive Plan, it is paramount that the issue of defining and preserving rural character be given serious and creative attention by the leaders of Grant in the immediate term. Otherwise, it very well could be too late.

Current Economic Overview:

Though agriculture represents 31% of the existing land use in Grant, as compared to 0.3% for commercial, 1.1% for industrial, and 2.6% for commercial recreation, it is not the dominant employer. In fact, of the respondents to the Citizen's Survey 87% (578 respondents; see question number 18A.) said they are dependent on employment outside of the community with 440 (74%) commuting eleven or more miles to work (see question 18 B). Only 13% (84 respondents, question 18A.) said they are employed within the boundaries of Grant. Only 17 respondents (question 16) identified themselves as farmers. Whereas, 74 respondents claimed some of their income is derived from farming (question 14), only five respondents claimed all of their income comes from farming (question 14).

Present employment opportunities in Grant include farming, veterinary clinic, dog kennels, horse stables, construction companies, orchards, light manufacturing, nurseries, golf courses, auto salvage yards, gravel mines, wholesale distributing, restaurant, and various home occupations.

Appendix A shows the responses to Citizen's Survey question 16 regarding principal occupations.

Past actions of the Town of Grant Board and the Planning Commission favored low-density residential and agricultural development over industrial/commercial uses. This policy is widely supported by the citizens of Grant and is likely to be the trend into the future.

Currently, commercial recreations (riding stables and three golf courses) comprise approximately 443 acres or 2.6 percent of Grant's land area. Commercial /general businesses (nursery and orchard operations and a small concentration of businesses along State Highway 36) comprise only 60 acres or 0.3 percent of land area in Grant. Industrial uses total only one percent of Grant and include mining operations (sand and gravel), auto salvage yards, and a refuse handling facility. A small concentration of other industrial business is located near the intersection of Lake Elmo Avenue and State Highway 36.

Observations and Conclusions:

With the vast majority of residents dependent on employment eleven or more miles outside of Grant and with the decline of commercial agriculture and the current lack of opportunity in any expansion of commercial/industrial activity in Grant, several implications can be made.

The residents of Grant are highly dependent on their automobiles for commuting and shopping purposes, and they are putting heavy traffic pressure on some non-paved roads within the City

Given the high dependence on automobiles for employment commuting, the residents of Grant are somewhat vulnerable to a major change in the economics of commuting, for example fuel price.

The City of Grant owns four tracts of land designated park or otherwise assigned for public recreation. They are the Town Hall property (11 acres), Hubman-Mugg Park (25.4 acres), Lot 6 of Block 2 of Woodland Acres Plat 2 (2 acres), and the Mann Lake Access (50 foot strip of approximately 0.5 acres). All are undeveloped except the Town Hall property and there is currently very limited amount of money in the City budget for improvements or other expenses relative to such tracts.

In addition to these dedicated recreational areas, public and private trail systems have been partially developed in the City. Included in these systems is the Country View Bike Trail which traverses along Washington County Highway 12, the Department of Natural Resources Gateway State Trail which bisects the City from southwest to northeast, and a treadway along the east side of County Road 9 (Jamaca Avenue) from County Road 12 to Highway 96.

Grant has the highest density of horses in Washington County with more than one-fifth of the total horses in the County according to the Washington County Soil and Water Conservation District. Therefore, some City and County roads have horse trails within the shoulder area. Some of these horse trails are marked with equestrian signs to identify the trail and warn motorists. In addition to the public trails there are also numerous private trails within Grant.

Existing public non-motorized trail easements:

For more active recreation, excellent facilities at the Mahtomedi High School, including ball diamonds, tennis courts, and a track and football field, are available for use by Grant residents. The City has also developed a ball field on the Town Hall property. Other semi-public facilities include the Indian Hills, Sawmill and Applewood Hills Golf Courses.

It should also be mentioned that the Izaak Walton League of America maintains a wetland and wildlife habitat of approximately 102 acres in the northwest corner of the City.

It would appear that Grant has a good start on parks, trails, and open space system. However, the value and usefulness of this existing network will be dependent to a large extent on future additions and development which should be responsive to the recreational pursuits of the City residents. With the current amount of agricultural and/or vacant land (although shrinking due to housing development) plus more than forty acres of mostly undeveloped public parkland, the total area of available recreational land would seem to be adequate for today's population density. However, as the City population grows and as more land is converted to residential use, the recreational needs of the residents are expected to increase.

D. Community Facilities and Services

1. Transportation Systems and Function

A combination of State, County, and local roads serve Grant (Figure 15). Ideally, roads are designed to perform a designated function and are located to best serve the type of travel needed. The four functional classifications assigned by the Metropolitan Council that describe roads in Grant are principal arterial, minor arterial expander, minor arterial collector and local. Principal arterial routes are roadways intended to connect metropolitan areas, major industrial centers, etc. that are the highest traffic volume roadways. Minor arterial routes provide connections between important locations and other highway systems. "A" minor arterials are roads that are eligible for federal surface transportation program funds administered by the Transportation Advisory Board. While there is more access to local areas the emphasis is still on mobility. Collector roadways are designed to serve shorter trips. They collect and distribute traffic from neighborhoods and commercial and industrial areas. Local roads interconnect residential properties and industrial or commercial parcels.

Trunk Highway (TH) 36, the only principal arterial highway and the only four lane highway in Grant, runs along the southern border of the City. "A" minor arterial expander routes in the City are TH 96, Washington County Road (CR) 12, and CR 9 from CR 12 to TH 96. Minor arterial connector roads in the City are CR 7 and CR 15. Jamaca Avenue from CR12 to TH36 is a proposed expander. All other roads in Grant are local roads.

The City understands that Washington County intends to upgrade County Road 15 to "principal arterial" at some future time (after 2015) and expects to transfer County Road 68 to the City's jurisdiction with an appropriate turnback.

By definition, a capacity deficiency exists when the 1990 average daily traffic exceeds the acceptable daily capacity of the roadway. According to Washington County 1997 data in Grant the western two miles of TH 36 and the part of CR 15 between TH 36 and CR 12 exceed the acceptable capacity by up to 25%. CR 15 between CR 12 and TH 96 exceeds the acceptable capacity by more than 25%. Current traffic counts and roadway standards for State and County highways are listed in Table11 and data from 1990 and 1996 are shown on the two maps in appendix C.

There are four Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) in Grant as shown on the map in Appendix D. The following Table 10 identifies the potential growth in each TAZ. Note that the total possible growth is 782 homes. At the current building rate of about 25 to 30 homes per year, this total will not be realized until the year 2022 or 2027

Table 10. Growth in Grant by Traffic Analysis Zones.

Capacity problems already exist on TH 36 and CR 15. Other capacity problems may develop as surrounding communities grow and develop but Grant cannot predict or control such development. Grant will work with Washington County and MNDOT as needed to help assure appropriate roadway facilities for through traffic.

Most local roads in Grant are gravel surfaced but the current ordinance requires that new roads be paved. The City has been amenable to requests for paving if area residents request and agree to pay for it. The process requires affected residents to petition for an estimate of the cost and then the required percentage of the assessable properties must agree to the construction.

Railroads:

The Canadian Pacific Rail Line (formerly known as the Soo Line) in northern Grant is the only major railroad in the City. It is classified as a Class One Rail Line. The Minnesota Zephyr is a dinner train that runs from Stillwater to Duluth Junction in Grant.

Public Transit:

There is no public transit in Grant except for various ridesharing and van pooling programs since the low residential density and lack of significant industry make any rapid transit impractical. Grant is not in the Metropolitan Transit Taxing Jurisdiction.

Aviation:

There are no public aviation facilities in Grant. Northport Airport is a small private facility on TH 96 (in section 16) that has had very little aviation activity during the past several years. Current Grant ordinances prohibit any structures, including antennas, over 200 feet in height and this prohibition will be continued.

Other Transportation:

Walking, bicycling, horseback riding, snowmobiling, etc. are primarily recreational activities in Grant and are addressed in the section on parks and trails. Some bicycling to destinations does occur primarily along existing roadways.

Credits: Some of the information detailed above is derived from the Washington County Comprehensive Plan draft dated June 9, 1995.
p 39 Figure 15 Transportation Map ( Not included, see official copy )

Table 11. Existing and forecasted cars per day on major roadways in and around Grant.  

*estimated

1. MNDOT Technical Services Division maps (Appendix C)

2. Data from Washington County Department of Public Works May 14, 1998

3. 2015 estimated information from Washington County Comprehensive Plan Figures T-4 and T-9 adopted February 6, 1996.

4. 2020 calculated as a linear extrapolation of the 1990 and 1996 data.

2. Public Utilities and Contracted Services

Public Utilities:

The Metropolitan Urban Service Unit (MUSA), the boundary between the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and the Rural Service Area lies along Grant's western boundary. The line is a planning delineation intended to separate urbanizing and intensifying land use types from rural uses. It is a tool for guiding growth into areas that are capable of providing the required services.

Grant is currently located in the Rural Service Area. In this area, With the exception of the Mahtomedi High School and Middle School, no publicly owned sewer or water facilities are present and no such services are planned. However, a semi-public water distribution system operates within the Indian Hills Subdivision. The bulk of the City, however, relies on private wells and on-site septic systems. Strict enforcement of the County Sanitary Sewer Disposal Ordinance in conjunction with the large minimum lot size requirement, has proven very successful in preventing surface and ground water pollution and concomitant health hazards.

The City Council intends to enforce appropriate development standards for well designed and maintained well and septic systems so that sewer service demands are not created. The Washington County Septic Ordinance, passed October 20, 1997, has been adopted by Grant and each succeeding amendment by Washington County will be considered and adopted as it applies to Grant.

Electric power is provided to the entire City by Northern States Power Company (NSP). The same company has been extending their natural gas lines and now has feeder lines along some main roads in the City. They have the capacity to provide gas to the entire City population, but only extend their service when a sufficient number of people in an area request it and are prepared to pay the up front expenses. If additional households in this area want to add natural gas then the cost per household is reduced accordingly. It should be stressed that one request is not sufficient reason for NSP to lay lines in an area. NSP is constantly surveying gas service needs and responds as rapidly as possible, but with the low residential density that prevails in Grant, extension of gas service is likely to be slow.

Contracted Services:

Police Protection:

Grant employs a part-time Police Officer to provide code enforcement, summons delivery, and law enforcement throughout the City. In addition, one full-time Deputy is provided under contract from the Washington County Sheriff Department. The Sheriff Department also patrols county roads and highways.

Police calls and related services are reviewed each year with the Washington County Sheriff to insure adequacy of such services.

Fire Protection:

The fire rating throughout Grant ranges from 4 to 6. Fire protection is provided through cooperative agreements and mutual aid pacts with the Stillwater and Mahtomedi Fire Departments.

The City is divided into two fire service districts by the centerline of County Road 9 in the north, and the centerline of Jamaca and Jasmine in the south. The greatest travel distance from the Stillwater fire station to a location within the Stillwater district is 8.5 miles and from the Mahtomedi station to a location within the Mahtomedi district is 7 miles.

Grant continuously pursues reduced response time to improve what is already considered a good rating for a city without a public water system. It is anticipated that these fire service contracts with Stillwater and Mahtomedi will continue into the future, providing complete and adequate fire protection without the necessity of building and operating a fire department within Grant.

Other Services:

Grant, through various intergovernmental agreements, is able to provide cost-effective delivery of other services. Recycling is provided with a joint powers agreement with Pine Springs and Lake Elmo.

Road improvements and maintenance (grading, new gravel, snow plowing, etc.) are contracted both privately and with the Washington County Public Works Department.

Administrative services are primarily provided through a part-time City Clerk. Administrative offices are shared in a cooperative agreement with the cities of Dellwood and Willernie. Planning and zoning, engineering, and legal services are contracted through private agreements.

Building code enforcement is arranged primarily through a cooperative agreement with the Washington County Building Official. Additional enforcement is provided as necessary by the City Police Officer.

3. City Government

City Council and Mayor:

Grant is a Statutory City governed by a five-member Council consisting of a Mayor and four Council Members. Each member is elected for a four-year term. Grant has a "Weak Mayor-Council" plan of governance, whereby each member has an equal vote with no member having more power than another. The Mayor acts as presiding officer at Council meetings and has additional minor duties. No individual Council Member holds specific administrative powers. Grant is a Fourth Class City as defined by its population.

The Council meets on the first Tuesday of each month at the City Hall. The duties of the Council are to review and rule on agenda items presented to them such as applications for rezoning, conditional use permits, variances, subdivisions, plat approvals, etc.

In addition to the five-member Council, the City is served by a Planning Commission, a City Clerk, and a Treasurer.

Planning Commission:

The Planning Commission is advisory to the City Council. The Council appoints the Planning Commission members. The Commission elects one member to serve as Chair and one member to serve as Vice Chair/Secretary. The members are required to be residents and registered voters in the City of Grant. Members of the Commission serve without compensation. It is the duty of the Commission to study and make recommendations to the City Council in matters relating to the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission also reviews applications for rezoning, conditional use permits, variances, subdivisions, and other items.

City Clerk:

The City Clerk is appointed by the City Council. The Clerk shall record minutes of meetings, post notices as required by law, file and preserve accounts audited by the City Council and perform any other duties as required.

City Treasurer:

The City Treasurer is appointed by the City Council. The duty of the Treasurer is to keep a true account of all money received and disbursed in the treasury. The Treasurer also provides the City Council with an audit with a register of orders presented for payments.

Voting Districts:

All of Grant falls into Senate District 56 and House District 56A for the Minnesota Legislature and is in the Sixth Congressional District.

Table 12. Fiscal Data
 

IV. Issue/Opportunity Identification

A. Community Survey

As part of the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission developed the "Citizen Survey" in order to get feedback from Grant residents about what direction the City should take over the next ten years. The 1996 Citizen Survey was much the same as the survey that was sent out about fifteen years ago. Most of the projects asked about in the survey are not yet planned or funded. Responses to the questions will help City government establish priorities and guide development of the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning ordinances will be reviewed to assure compliance with the Plan and these together will guide development and planning in Grant.

Detailed survey results are included in appendix A.

B. Summary of Issues/Opportunities

Significant issues and opportunities resulting from the survey results provide the fundamental philosophy for the development of this plan. In addition, the following Goals and Policies are designed to address all of the issues and opportunities previously identified in the Inventory and Analysis section of this plan. To summarize, these key issues and opportunities include: Reliable projections of overall population growth, new housing demands, etc., will help determine policies in dealing with growth control, education facility requirements, street and utility improvements, and commercial growth.

Soil characteristics are critical indicators of where and what type of land use development should occur.

Much of Grant is classified as being moderately or high moderately susceptible to groundwater contamination. Land use development should be cognizant of these risks.

Soil characteristics guide the type and location of development including soil suitability for on-site septic systems, basements, and agricultural uses.

Many lakes, ponds, and wetlands are extremely valuable for their water holding and cleansing capabilities.

Sound planning and reasonable implementations are critical to the maintenance of Grant's natural amenities and rural character.

Grant's goal has been to use land and related resources so that these are undiminished for future generations.

It is paramount that the issue of defining and preserving rural character be given serious attention.

Grant has a good start on parks, trails, and open space. The value of this existing network will be dependent on future additions and development. The recreational needs of the residents are expected to increase.

Grant intends to enforce appropriate development standards for well septic systems so that sewer service demands are not created.

V. Goals and Policies

Residents of Grant have developed a vision statement to lend guidance and create a shared vision for the development of goals and policies. The following vision statement provides a shared view of the future of Grant and the foundation on which the community stands.

Vision Statement

The vision for Grant is a rural residential community abundant in scenic, recreational, and natural amenities. The community shall strive toward the protection of residential, natural, and agricultural resources to enhance and protect the existing strong rural character of the community. City services and government will be provided at a level necessary to maintain a rural quality of life, while minimizing the effects of urban encroachment and controlling municipal expenditures.

Goals and policy statements rely heavily on the results of the inventory and analysis section and input gathered from the citizen survey. The following goals, chosen by the citizens of Grant to shape their future, are presented as a broad based direction.

Key policy statements to provide guidance to specific land use issues follow each broad goal. Together they are the sum and product of this Comprehensive Plan. They represent the most important guidance to the City, one of a shared vision for the future based on a weighting of past and present growth trends and pressures, resident sentiments, existing features, and current land use within and surrounding Grant.

Goals and Policy Statements

Goal 1: Preserve the rural character of Grant.

A critically important issue identified by residents of Grant is to maintain the rural character of the community. This will be achieved by providing the means for the efficient use of the remaining undeveloped land within Grant with the goal of maintaining contiguous blocks of economically viable agricultural land, mature woodlands and wetlands and open space, and of preserving scenic views, natural drainage systems, and other desirable features that support and form the foundation of the physical landscape and resulting character of Grant. To achieve this level of protection the City of Grant will encourage citizens, landowners, and developers to creatively work towards residential development and subdivision design that holds to the highest standards of the community and promotes its rural character. It is recognized that development will continue to occur in Grant and that it is extremely important that such development be controlled appropriately.

Key Policies:

The City of Grant is committed to protecting natural resources within the community through maintenance of existing resources and the careful planning and designing of future development to avoid any negative impact upon these resources.

Key Policies:

Grant has a long-standing history of individual privacy, responsibility, and low tax burdens. To maintain these values and quality of life the residents of Grant choose to limit the level of public services provided by the City. This is evident in the City's exclusive reliance on on-site septic systems and contracting out of many of the individual public services provided to residents. Residents of Grant have come to expect this type of service delivery, as indicated in the recent citizen survey, and do not desire a change in this policy.

Key Policies:

Maintaining a rural residential quality of life goes hand in hand with protecting the physical elements that form visual rural character. Limiting public utilities such as municipal sewers, enforcing one lot per ten acres residential density, providing access to community recreational opportunities, and encouraging and enhancing agricultural business opportunities are ways the City of Grant can build a strong commitment to a rural lifestyle.

Key Policies:

The City of Grant will be committed to more effectively communicate information to the citizens of Grant for their improved understanding of relevant issues and the development of a more participative and cohesive community.

Key Policies:

VI. Comprehensive Development Plan

A. Overall Growth Strategy

Regional Land Use Context and Challenges

Since the early 1970's the Metropolitan Council has identified Grant as a permanently rural area. This designation attempted to ensure the Township/City remains a dominantly rural community by establishing a maximum residential density of one unit per ten acres of land. This strategy of low residential densities attempts to balance residential development with the preservation of agriculture and open space.

Since the late 1970's the City of Grant has enforced a one per ten rural density requirement and the use of private on-site septic systems in an effort to preserve its rural character and minimize public expenditure. Many residents feel these efforts have been successful and desire the continuation of these commitments (see community survey).

The intent of Grant for the next 25 years is to continue its commitment to rural character and maintain maximum densities of one unit per ten acres with no public sewer or water facilities. In addition, the City of Grant will encourage the use of open space development where appropriate to preserve and enhance the rural character of the community through the preservation of open space and by attempting to minimize land use conflicts between agricultural and residential land uses.

Washington County Comprehensive Planning Context

The most recent Washington County comprehensive plan has designated the City of Grant as General Rural (Figure 16). This designation establishes a maximum density of one residential unit per ten acres of land, consistent with the past designation of the Metropolitan Council and the desires of the City of Grant. The unique geographic location of Grant between Mahtomedi to the west and Stillwater to the east provides an important buffer of rural land use and scenic amenities between two growing urban areas. To encourage a diversity of land use and rural residential quality, the City of Grant and the County have determined that Grant is an ideal setting to meet this goal.

However, in the most recent Metropolitan Council Regional Blueprint (Figure 17) approximately 200 acres of land in Grant have been identified as 2020 MUSA (Metropolitan Urban Services Area) and urban reserve (Figure 18). This designation by the Metropolitan Council does not appear to be justified within past comprehensive planning efforts by the Metropolitan Council, the City of Grant, and Washington County. Upon close examination of the boundary definition it is determined that the boundary is solely based on watershed definition to allow for gravity fed municipal sewer and not on existing land use patterns. Therefore the City of Grant does not agree with the Metropolitan Council's land use designation and desires that the Council reconsider its boundary definitions while keeping the current physical and cultural context of Grant in mind for the following reasons:

Figure 16. Washington County Comprehensive Plan General Land Use Map

Figure 17. Metro 2040 Regional Growth Strategy

Figure 18. Proposed MUSA Line

Figure 19. Zoning Map

B. Land Use

The primary purpose of the Comprehensive Development Plan is to provide specific guidance for the location, density, and type of future development within Grant. It addresses each of the critical land use categories:

Land Use Plan

General Policy and Development Statement

Critical to the future of Grant is the maintaining of rural character and quality of life in spite of existing development and pressure surrounding the City. The prohibition of public sanitary sewer and water, the requirement of one unit per ten acres of land maximum density, and the long standing traditions of individual responsibility and privacy have led Grant to develop in this manner. The following goals and policies provide direction to meet this vision.

Goal 1: Ensure the preservation of existing rural character through appropriate rural development guidelines and ordinances.

Key Policies:

Key Policies:

Key Policies:

Key Policies:

In addition to the above goals and policies, Figure 14 identifies current land uses within the City of Grant. Figure 19 is the current zoning map. As stated, only rural residential is foreseen as future development within Grant. Commercial development is restricted to the existing general business core area, and no further industrial development is anticipated in Grant. However, as a result of changing demographics and needs of City residents, Grant should remain open to the future needs of its residents. In 1997 there were about 1,300 homes in Grant. If all lands in Grant were fully developed under our current ordinances, there is a potential of approximately 2,033 homes.

Rural Residential and Agricultural

The primary land use designation within the City of Grant is rural residential.This classification is based on one unit per ten acres of land with a five acre minimum lot size and strives to develop the remaining area of Grant in a manner appropriate for a rural lifestyle and the protection of existing agricultural land uses.

General Business

No new commercial land has been added to the official land use map, however, those areas already within the general business zone have been identified. Expansion of these businesses will be limited to uses compatible with a rural lifestyle and in alignment with design standards present within the Subdivision Ordinance. New businesses proposed within the general business zone as a result of vacancy of an existing business will also be held to strict design standards and the appropriate regulations as identified within the Subdivision Ordinance. The Subdivision Ordinance was prepared to implement the desire of this Comprehensive Plan and the protection of rural character and a rural quality of life.

C. Housing

General Policy and Development Statement

The City of Grant will encourage all developers of future housing developments to work within the existing framework of the City to promote the rural character and rural quality of life. As the future need for senior housing arises, the City of Grant will strive to accommodate this need. Goal 1: Ensure that future rural residential development maintains a rural community and a rural quality of life.

Key Policies:

Key Policies:

D. Transportation

General Policy and Development Statement:

The City of Grant in cooperation with MN/DOT and Washington County will provide an efficient and safe transportation system. The transportation system will strive to meet the general vision of the community to maintain its rural quality of life by limiting the expansion of high-volume arterial highways. Currently, the City of Grant is adequately served by north/south and east/west arterial highways and wishes to limit the expansion of major arterial thoroughfares within the community. However, Ironwood Avenue in Grant is currently used by many as a route between Hugo and County Road 9. This is a local service road and is inadequate for this use. Grant will work with Washington County to try to solve the need for a north/south connection in this area.

Goal 1: Maintain a transportation network at reasonable cost and adequate to meet the safety, health, and welfare needs of the community.

Key Policy:

Key Policies:

E. Natural and Cultural Resources

Water Management Plan

Key Policies:

The City has a number of surface water bodies and acquires all drinking water from underground aquifer sources. To protect the quality and future availability of water resources the City places high standards on on-site sanitary sewer treatment facilities and encourages the use of best management practices for construction sites and agricultural areas.

Best management practices for residential construction include those listed in "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" published by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. For agricultural best management practices refer to those published by the Minnesota Extension Service.

By adopting the four watershed management plans and encouraging the use of best management practices established by the Minnesota Extension Service and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency the City of Grant will ensure the future of its groundwater and surface water supplies for generations to come.

Historic Preservation Plan

General Policy and Development Statement

Features of historic significance such as structures, archeological sites, cemeteries, and historic landscapes such as farmsteads, woodlots, and wetland environments enhance the general rural character of the community. Preservation of these features is a high priority of this Plan.

Goal 1: Grant wishes to preserve historic buildings and artifacts.

Key Policies:

Parks and Trails

General Policy and Development Statement

As identified in the citizen survey, residents highly value accessibility to the current trail system. Maintaining this accessibility and increasing opportunities for recreational activities is a general policy of the City. The City of Grant will use the creation of parks and trails to foster the general rural character of the community.

Goal 1: Increase non-motorized trail opportunities and connections to existing trails.

Key Policies:

Key Policies:

General policy and development statement:

At this time the City of Grant does not provide city water or sewer in any manner. As a permanently rural community this policy will continue to be the guiding framework through at least the year 2008 and the City will not provide these services. Domestic waste will be treated on-site and water supply will also be the responsibility of the individual homeowner.

Goal 1: Ensure the long term health and safety of residents by protecting groundwater resources from contamination.

Key Policies:

Key Policy

1. Encourage new residential developments to incorporate underground utilities.

VII. Implementation Strategy

Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan is the first step in guiding the future growth and development of the City. Imperative to the success of this document is the variety of tools used to implement the plan. The following section briefly acknowledges these implementation tools as they relate to the Comprehensive Plan.

Zoning Ordinance

Zoning is the primary tool used by communities to direct growth within their community. It consists of text and an official map that separates the community into the desired land use zones and describes the legal uses within each zone. The first step for developers is to consult the zoning map to determine if the desired use is legal. The zoning map will also establish a permitting process that a developer is to follow as well as a description for conditional use permits and non-conforming use.

Implementation Strategy

The Subdivision Ordinance builds upon the Zoning Ordinance and provides specific design standards and regulations to implement the Comprehensive Plan elements. Subdivision regulations provide detailed information on easements for right-of-ways, street improvements, lot setbacks, and other design features. It also aids the developer on elements of design, such as landscaping, site layout requirements of soil surveys, and other key physical elements of the Plan.

Implementation Strategy

At this time the City of Grant does not have an officially adopted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). As part of the comprehensive planning process a CIP will need to be formulated and adopted to guide the future capital improvements of the City, such as local roadway improvement, park and trail maintenance and other public services provided by the City. When the Comprehensive Plan is adopted, its provisions will be included in all City budgets. This CIP will be completed by June 1, 1999.

Plan Revisions

Finally, the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan is on-going dynamic process. Changing circumstances including demographics, service needs of the community and unforeseen situations will require the periodic review and potential revision of the Comprehensive Plan. It is the responsibility of local decision-makers to remain open and responsive to the needs and desires of the larger community. Regardless of the course of action taken by local decision-makers, citizen input and involvement is imperative.

References

1,280 surveys were sent out, and 649 responses were returned within eight weeks after the mailing. Approximately 25% of the returns were from each of the four geographic quadrants. Half were from Mahtomedi School District 832 and half from Stillwater School District 834. The vast majority of responses were in favor of preserving a rural community. Most responders want a population growth less than 10%, while 27% want a growth of 10 to 20%. Most also want to keep lot sizes the same or larger. To guide development in Grant, 60% (of 649) believe that current zoning is appropriate and 20% want more restrictive zoning while only 12% feel that current zoning is too restrictive. 55% of the responses support current land use guidelines and 28% want more specific guidelines while 9% want less specific guidelines. 56% of responders want more environmental protection while 38% feel current protection is adequate. 40% of the responders want more enforcement of current Grant regulations and 48% do not feel the need for more enforcement. The land uses preferred by far were single family homes -- 96%, and hobby farms - 87%. Preference values of other land uses were: commercial farms - 42%, senior housing - 19%, convenience center - 14%, light industry - 14%, retail/commercial - 9%, multi-family housing - 7%, low income/subsidized housing - 4%, major shopping center - 1%, and other - 2%.

Regarding recreation facilities, 45% would like to see more while 52% checked "no" to this question. The following facilities were suggested by those who checked "yes" (from 294 respondents): hiking trails - 62%, natural areas - 55%, biking trails - 53%, ski trails - 51%, horse trails - 38%, playgrounds - 28%, ball parks - 22%, skating/hockey rinks - 20%, snowmobile trails - 16%, tennis courts - 15%, swimming pools - 13%, basketball courts - 7%, dirt-bike trails - 6% and other - 4%. Those checking "yes" to more recreation facilities are prepared to pay the following additional annual taxes: No added tax - 15%, up to $25 - 39%, $26 to $50 - 26%, $51 to $75 - 13%, more than $75 - 8%.

With respect to improved access to Hubman/Mugg/Bass Lake, 27% checked "yes" and 59% checked "no." For Mann Lake 29% checked "yes" and 59% checked "no." There was no significant difference in these answers among the four geographic response areas even though both parks are in Area 1.

48% of respondents thought that Grant should not spend additional funds for road maintenance, while 47% wanted more funds spent on roads. 23% of respondents wanted to spend more for police protection, and 24% wanted more fire protection. For these services, 20% (of the 369 "yes" respondents) did not want to pay any more, 36% would pay up to $25 more, 22% would pay $26-$50 more, 10% would pay $51-$75 and 12% would pay over $75 more.

With respect to having Council meetings on cable TV, 246 checked "yes" while 335 checked "no." 84 respondents work in Grant, while 578 do not.

Concern about Grant issues: (% of 649) 

Age distribution in respondent households:
 

Washington County was one of nine counties formed upon the separation of Minnesota Territory from Wisconsin. The Town of Grant was officially organized October 20 1858 with the first three supervisors and a clerk as a Congressional Township containing the normal six-mile by six-mile area. It remained a township until November of 1996 when it became a city. This community was originally named Greenfield Township after the hometown in Massachusetts of the first settlers, Albion Masterman and William Rutherford, who arrived in 1849. In 1864 the legislature found that another township in Minnesota was named Greenfield so the township was renamed in 1864 after General U.S. Grant. The original area of The Town of Grant contained the current region plus the area up to the eastern border of the City of White Bear Lake.

At first, the township government consisted only of annual meetings. The agenda of these meetings was about local matters, such as straying animals. In 1859 the Township passed its first ordinance regarding swine running at large. One year later the ordinance was broadened to include bulls and stallions. In 1862 dogs were included for the first time. The first tax was to fund bounties to entice volunteers for the Civil War. In 1869 a tax of twenty-five cents for each $100 of assessed real estate was created to pay for construction of roads. Road maintenance came from a tax of two days labor from each fit adult male.

During the first twenty years or so, annual meetings and elections in the township drew only about twelve or thirteen voters. Despite the population growth, interest in Township affairs remained the same for over fifty years.

Fiscal affairs also provide an interesting look into the early history of Grant. In 1865 an annual budget of $1200 was approved for Town purposes. Ten years later the tax imposed for road purposes was only twenty five cents per one hundred dollars of valuation. Land belonging to the railroad was sold to early settlers for as little as $2.75 per acre.

Over the years communities have split out of Grant. The first, Lincolntown, was formed in 1918. Lincolntown later got a taste of its own medicine in 1931 when Mahtomedi split off from them and incorporated as a city. Pine Springs and Birchwood later divided off from Lincolntown. The remnants of Lincolntown were eventually absorbed into Mahtomedi and Grant. Dellwood and Willernie also came out of from Grant. The City of White Bear Lake also annexed small parcels on the east side of Century Avenue. The last annexation from Grant was by Dellwood in 1993.

The unincorporated village of Withrow straddles the northern border of Grant. It was named for an early settler, Thomas Withrow. This village was sited at the split of the Soo Line Railroad to Sault Saint Marie and Chicago. During its early days the community was an important railroad and telegraph station. Several businesses and a large creamery were located there. Withrow rapidly declined after the railroad de-emphasized its operations there.

In the summer of 1996, The Town of Grant successfully applied to be changed from a township to a city. The Minnesota Municipal Council approved its application in early September. The purpose of this change was primarily to protect the rural nature of Grant. The Town Board dissolved after its last meeting in October and a City Council with four Council Members and a Mayor took office after the November election.

The first efficient transportation system in Grant was railroads. Two railroads and a streetcar line passed through Grant. The first railroad, the Stillwater and Saint Paul Railroad, was built between White Bear Lake and Stillwater by the citizens of Stillwater beginning in 1867. They soon sold it to what later became the Northern Pacific Railway. At one time it was a very busy railroad. Several passenger trains went through Grant daily and logging trains passed by every hour. The closure of the sawmills in Stillwater changed this busy line into a branch line. Its business slowly dwindled until it was abandoned in the early 1980's. The Burlington Northern Railroad, the successor to the Northern Pacific, donated to the Minnesota Railroad Museum the section of the tracks running from Duluth Junction, in the middle of Grant, to downtown Stillwater. The museum later sold this property to the Minnesota Zephyr, which currently operates a dinner train on it. Washington County made an attempt to purchase the rest of the right-of-way leading to White Bear Lake to create a trail, but the railroad sold it to the adjacent landowners instead.

The Wisconsin Central Railroad (not the current railroad with this name), which later became part of the Soo Line Railroad, built the second railroad in Grant in 1886. Its original main line between Minneapolis and Sault Saint Marie and Chicago passes through the northern part of the community. Since their passenger trains had to backtrack from Saint Paul to Minneapolis to enter the main line, the railroad constructed a spur line from Saint Paul to intersect the main line east of Withrow. These tracks passed through the diagonal of Grant. After the Soo Line discontinued its passenger train service in the early 1960's this spur line became rarely used. It was officially abandoned about 1980 and the State of Minnesota purchased its right-of-way and converted it into a trail for non-motorized use. This trail is currently the most heavily used public recreational facility in Minnesota. The Soo Line purchased the Milwaukee Road Railway in 1985 and made its tracks its main line to Chicago. The amount of traffic on the Soo tracks in Grant has since significantly decreased. The principle owner of the Soo Line, the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP Rail), has since merged the Soo Line into its network. CP Rail now owns the tracks west of Withrow and those to the east are owned by the Wisconsin Central Railroad.

A streetcar line once ran from Stillwater and Saint Paul. It was constructed in 1894. During its operation, there were four conditional stops in Grant. The streetcars would often reach speeds of sixty miles per hour as they passed through Grant. The portion of the streetcar line between Mahtomedi and Stillwater was closed in 1932 due to competition from automobiles and the rest of the tracks were removed when Wildwood Park in Mahtomedi closed in 1951. The former right-of-way can still be seen at places along Highway 12 and in other places in Grant.

The earliest roads in Minnesota followed existing Indian trails. Later, the army created roads. Although no military roads were built in Grant, one paralleled the Saint Croix River. Highway 95 is built on parts of its path. Stagecoach and logging roads followed the military roads. The first roads in Grant were Vincent Street (Quail) and Rum River Road (parts of Highway 96 and 88th Street). They generally followed high regions to avoid wetlands so they are winding in nature. After the township was surveyed, roads were generally placed, when practical, on section and quarter section lines. The original names of the roads in Grant were changed in 1973 to conform to the universal naming scheme created by the Metropolitan Council. Most of the minor roads in Grant are still gravel, but the community adopted road standards during the 1980's requiring that all newly developed roads be paved.

The first school in Grant opened in 1856 and was followed by others as settlers arrived. These schools met in one-room buildings each operated by a separate school district and school board. The current City Hall is one of these school buildings. A couple of them are now homes. Many residents remember the red one-room school that stood at the corner of Highway 96 and Jamaca. These school districts eventually consolidated into the Mahtomedi and Stillwater school districts. The Mahtomedi High and Middle Schools are located in Grant.

The first church in Grant was the German Protestant Lutheran Church organized in 1872. It recently merged with a church in Baytown and they sold their property in Grant. The only cemetery in Grant is adjacent to this former church building. Two churches have been established in Grant since 1980.

Except for Withrow, Grant was almost exclusively a farming community during its first century. However, its proximity to the Twin Cities and closeness to Highway 36 and Interstate Highway 694 made it attractive for development as home sites. Discounting the village of Withrow, the first platted subdivision was Hickory Park followed by Wake Robin Acres, plotted as one acre lots in the early 1960's. As more neighborhoods came into existence, concern about potential pollution from septic systems caused the Town Board to change the minimum lot size standard from one to 2.5 acres in 1968. Minimum lot sizes of 3.0 acres were required in some places. Later, the Metropolitan Council issued a directive that all future subdivisions in the rural townships within its jurisdiction have an average lot size of ten acres and a minimum lot size of five acres. The Grant Town Board adopted this directive in 1976. Since then, much of Grant has been developed into home sites. Only a few commercial farms now remain in Grant, but many small hobby farms, mostly for raising, training, and boarding horses replace them.

Grant has experienced only small amounts of commercial development. The first was Northport, a small airport, used for light aircraft. During World War II it had a burst of activity when it was used for training glider pilots. The hangers built by the US Army still exist. After the war ended the airport returned to its original role of servicing a few single-engine airplanes. It is now inactive. Some scattered commercial development occurred soon after World War II - a restaurant, an auto salvage yard, and several garbage haulers. Two commercial zones were later created. The first commercial zone contains a farm supply store located at the corner of Highway 36 and Keats avenue. The other commercial zone is at the corner of Highways 17A and 36 where several small businesses operate. Several agricultural related businesses, two commercial apple orchards, a large nursery, and family farms sell to the public.

Appendix C. Traffic Count Maps

Figure 20: 1990 Traffic Count Map

Figure 21: 1996 Traffic Count Map