Loading...
9b. Update on Comp Plan i... CITY O q---.b I 1 OE ANI1ASSEN . 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 4-- ,,. . y IMEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council - 5-�. 9/ 1 FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Directors -- 1 DATE: April 30, 1991 ..5--&-F/ SUBJ: Update on Comprehensive Plan Approval Process 1 I have been extremely busy the y y ove r th past three to four weeks • working with the Metropolitan Council to facilitate their review of 1 . our Comprehensive Plan submittal. Initially, Mike Munson, the Council Demographer, threw a major roadblock our way by his refusal to update his population and employment forecasts. In all other I respects, Council staff was fairly complimentary about our Plan. Fortunately, the Planning Commission adopted a very conservative stance when projecting future land demand. Mr. Munson is only I willing to use the Highway 212 forecast, which we listed as the low end of the range of our projections. He has no comparable forecast for employment. Since we were so conservative, our actual request for land being brought into the MUSA is consistent with the -lower I projections Mr. Munson wants to use. He has also developed a rather incongruous methodology to project employment growth in the next ten years. The end result is that it appears likely that with 1 voodoo statistical analysis, the Metropolitan Council may be able to justify the land request that we have made without any significant changes. I have not yet seen any written staff reports Ion this matter, but this is their current position. The Metropolitan Council is scheduled to review the Comprehensive Plan in committee on Thursday afternoon, May 16, 1991, with final I Metropolitan Council approval on Thursday afternoon, May 23, 1991. It may be useful to have attendance by members of the Planning Commission and City Council at one or both of these meetings. I Iwill keep you updated on this matter. We have also been busy responding .to additional requests for information by the Metropolitan Council staff. I have attached a I series of memorandums that were forwarded to the Metropolitan Council staff for your review. We also had comments received from several adjoining communities. The Chaska comments caused us no 1 difficulty and I have heard that Minnetonka is also satisfied with I ' Mayor and City Council April 30, 1991 Page 2 the Plan. Eden Prairie has raised some issues with the Plan that in my opinion went beyond normal planning or professional ' considerations. The City Manager and I met with the Eden Prairie City Manager and Community Development Director to discuss these issues. We believe that a more cooperative stance has resulted. Copies of the correspondence is attached. ' Lastly, I am attaching a memorandum from Jim Curry of Jim Curry Investment Companies. The Council may recall that Mr. Curry made ' several presentations in front of the City Council in favor of the Plan. Gene Quinn, a neighbor on an adjoining residential parcel raised issues regarding a desire to see his property buffered. Mr. t Curry's property is guided for mixed use. Staff indicated that we cannot require any buffering until actual construction was proposed. Mr. Curry indicated that he would try to cooperate with Mr. Quinn and independently work out a solution to this situation. In an attached letter, Mr. Curry indicates that he is purchasing 100 trees for Mr. Quinn to plant along his property line. Staff is quite pleased that Mr. Curry was able to work this out in such an appropriate manner. • 1 1 . JIM CURRY INVESTMENT COMPANIES 4817 Upper Terrace Edina,Minnesota 55435 612/527.5351 y / - 9 f RECEIVED .644 Pewit APR 191991 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN -r-ts.k. °Lk -r Aftref4;-A 'A' 07AR g„w7, I ,t /moo P. P ? a Tifka. Auk Ayr. rtrei , awl 1 _ JIM CURRY INVESTMENT COMPANIES 4817 Upper Terrace Edina,Minnesota 55435 612/927-9351 April 17, 1991 ' City of Chanhassen Attention: Paul Krause, City Planner 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Paul: Eugene Quinn asked me to buy 100 trees that he would plant and maintain in the 100-foot setback along his homestead in Chanhassen. This is part of the intersection area for highways #212 and #101. I was fully aware I was not required to do this, but I decided to try to make Gene happy anyway. At a public meeting, Ursula called this "exemplary cooperation with neighbors." So be it. I talked to you, Paul, and you said if a plat were in for approval now, the existing city ' ordinance would require 6-foot trees. We also noted that nothing will be built in the intersection before 1995 -- if everything is on schedule. ' Then I talked to Planning Commission member, Tim Erhart, who owns a tree farm in Chanhassen. Tim recommended Tom Wolcyn, a wholesale tree dealer in Cambridge, Minnesota. ' I called Mr. Wolcyn and have bought and paid for 100 trees that will be 6 feet tall by 1995. See his letter, the bill and a copy of my check. ' . �'n a it _,,1 . e j F.. •�7..1 ��. satisfied t al trez,:., that will 1- -•-0.� ,i ♦c VGIi�• ..ul.�.. t.iii'i':4i �_ ♦`..a. Y l:lv�`11 �1SC> µ•-!d is SGZ�1J11� i�r�_�1 t,rI:, ltC+.. ���;� V�.:li vE 1G1:VC�C•'.ai his home Friday, April 19, 1991. ' So Gene is happy with his 100 trees and I am happy to have this matter behind me. PPY PPY ' Let's all remember this when intersection planning and platting begins during the 1990's. ' Greetings to you, Paul, and to all who will be given copies of this letter and enclosures! • Sincerely, Q/4...0‘ a4/17,.. Jim Curry 1 APR191991 Enclosures CITY OF CHRhttiikS:ittd . ¢. Wolcyn Tree Farms and Nursery - ,. I'l.}5.• Z �A L�1� t TTi 0".9 Rural Route 2 • • : nt Cambridge, Minnesota 55008 J i V:Fy 4? 612/689-3346 Metro - 370-1511 ■ 620-wleeale Z�A� nzcze.fJeed. Pf./Vusreexy-.920e 1 April 8, 1991 I I• Dear Mr:'Quinn, ' I Our company specializes in growing evergreen trees, in the Cambridge area. We have over 800 acres in production. I We will be supplying a mixture of evergreen trees for Jim Curry to be - I planted. These trees will be 3-4 feet tall and should grow to be 6' trees - by the fall of 1995. Naturally they do not grow at exactly the same rate, - some will be larger than others. But, the average size should easily exceed I 6 feet in height. We will be arranging delivery to you with Mr. Curry. I Sincerely, I I Tom Wolcyn - • • 1 TW:mr I I Member: Minnesota Christmas Tree Growers Association National Christmas Tree Association _ Wisconsin Christmas Tree Producers Association Minnesota Nursery&Landscape Association ' [ [NO .. g. (i ).j W I Wolcyn Tree Farms.and Nursery it\\ Cambridge, Minnesota 55008 004 9 38 I . 6121689-3346 Metro-370-1511 7/ 7-- TX FAX 612/370-1511 INVOICE DATE SALESPERSON / -4 SHIP TO TO Z4/14) I • -- 9 ,,, ,,,, T),,,,,, ,,, •... ..... ........ .,.... _. 1 .., ,,,,,, 9 A .7 .35-/ Iii..DATE-SHIPP.iD. :::.......7..-, ,: .:SHIPeici+AA::::. 6"FzEi-grii-E.c.."!:::OTiO: ::"ititi; i i;. th15--'-'•_._.;T --77—::Fa-li47ZION_..'• -__--„W:..,#NT., 4:2 lit4'7-1.0.14,,,,Fii=igiretrX-,Q71:02:ALT-F:::'',-. /Kix 7 • , - • -4- e(k.fL_ 3 - Y i i • _.... ._____ _. ..... .. .._ ,.... .. ... _ ... ... ._ Icr-0--61--1 S. .. .... 11---- ----- --- •• • --- .... .. ._..... 1)..‘2....6./•" 7 / b-0 i .,. ......--. ....... .... .. .... ._. . ..... ••--- --- ____..............___. .. ....... .......__. ........ .. ... _ .......... !"---' I.— ..: . / • t F6 ' .,. I II > ... •.... . ' , ,. .. . 7 5-O oc2 ' .. .....,_ " . I- • . ., _ I- ' , ._.. ..... . . .• . , I ., • . . ,rI , OiRIGINAL O . .. Ogak/Cj 12W PONE TOL FREE 22546 kti ......... ..---. gin RI Ne,weat Bank Bloomington,N.A. 9 4 6 JIM CURRY INVESTMENT COMPANY NO• ' South ISM Bloomington,MN 55431 III 4817 UPPER TERRACE III EDINA, MN 55435 75-1660/910 CHECK NO. 1DATE AMOUNT j f q I PAY I, / 9GII vC � �SVZ r I TO VI TAA...t. 9-ar m.. - --I THE '! ORDER 1 OF -1 a-4- 71-4m-4-ti-A1--. let.w4-.2..... A , e x A/7 i "000946 II° 01.09 LO L66051: 9 L III O L's' 38511 '-' °c.uxc cwcc.awl..rcw .. ---_ -:. _ DETACH AND RETAIN THIS STATEMENT THE ATTACHED CHECK IS IN PAYMENT OF ITEMS DESCRIBED BELOW. I ` JIM CURRY INVESTMENT COMPANY IF NOT CORRECT PLEASE NOTIFY US PROMPTLY NO RECEIPT DESIRED. DELUXE - FORM NWC-3 V-2 DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT it ''' / 9 - ci 1 1 o--o A)zi,L.. z ,e,sr& red,az, hid: S,,,,,,d,,,,„k Nal9 6 ,7, 1 _ 6?Akt-A--■ .4.v. , /DAR. /Oro (-I-- ,:=7,14,i;# _ I 1 OA 0 —�� Q_I I i I. 1 I 1 I I • 1 - I • 1 .1 CITYOF 4 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-19005 FAX (612)937-5739 April 30, 1991 Mr. Richard Thompson, Planner Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 East 5th Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Rich: You recently received a letter from Eden Prairie that, in part, questioned some of the vacant land calculations that were presented ' by the City of Chanhassen. I have had several prior conversations_ with you regarding Eden Prairie's position. Regardless of the intent of the City of Eden Prairie, I felt it was necessary that I respond to you and explain in detail the facts behind this issue. Eden Prairie's comments were based in part upon a brochure that was prepared by the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority that was made available for distribution at a recent convention. First a note regarding Housing and Redevelopment Authorities in general and ours specifically. Housing and Redevelopment Authorities are community boosters. It is their job to promote ' growth within the community. As such, they are a rather gung ho group based upon their desire to get things moving. The attached brochure was prepared by the HRA without input from Planning. It is unfortunate that this was the case, but given staff's time constraints I believe this situation is understandable. However, the bottom line is that the information cited by Eden Prairie is ' somewhat misleading for several reasons. The first is that the sites illustrated include not only office industrial sites but also land guided and zoned for commercial development within the Chanhassen Central Business District and even one site that is zoned and guided for multi-family housing. The brochure's primary purpose was to create some interest in developing these parcels and it was always intended that if anyone was serious about pursuing this matter that we would be holding further meetings at the City to explain our intent. You can correlate the brochure with the Land Use Plan, but I have also provided page by page commentary outlining this information. 1 1 Mr. Richard Thompson , April 30, 1991 Page 2 There were comments made regarding the definition the city used for land that may currently be vacant but not on the market due to ownership and intent. As .I indicated in my letter to Eden Prairie, these parcels are something of a moving target and thus it is difficult to be fully accurate but I believe we have made a good faith effort to do so. We note for example that some parcels, most notably the Ward Estate, which is shown as available, vacant industrial land, are in fact going to be changed with the adoption of the new Comprehensive Plan. The HRA brochure cites the current guide plan designation of industrial use but this is going to be changed to commercial/residential by the new guide plan which recognizes the relocation of Hwy. 101 in this vicinity. A second anomaly is the fact that land being shown on Map #2 as being available vacant land which includes 10 acres that is actually located outside of our MUSA line. When the MUSA line is relocated, this land will be brought in as office industrial land, but as you are aware that is not currently the case. I have put a note as to the disposition of the property on each page. Two pages warrant special mention. Map Reference #3 and #6 includes a 51.5 acre parcel owned by the Redmond family and a 17 acre parcel owned by the Paul family, who owns the Nordic Track Company. We did not include the Redmond site as available vacant land since the Redmond family owns this land personally and it is being held for the future expansion of their company. In fact, last year preliminary plans were submitted to develop this property but in light of the current economic situation, these plans were put on hold. The 17 acre tract owned by the Paul family was shown as vacant land in the Comprehensive Plan. This is because we made a determination that since the Nordic Track Company decided to relocate into Chaska, eventually the Paul family would put this parcel on the market, therefore, it should be listed as available. I think this points out the difficulty in making these determinations which result from trying to micro-manage individual parcels. The second parcel that warrants some discussion is Map Reference #10, which includes property owned by the DataSery Company. For many years this property has been held for future expansion of the DataSery site. It is owned by their parent company out of Atlanta. This situation appears to have changed in the last month whereupon a portion of the property is now actively being marketed. Thus, our land availability tables are wrong relative to this site, however, we would point out two facts about it. The first is that Southwest Metro Transit has been negotiating to buy a 5 acre park and ride facility, and the second is that there is a large storm water retention pond detained on the southern portion of the property. While there is clearly additional land that would become available as vacant property, you can see the problem we have in giving you an accurate total or why this total changes from time to time. I t • Mr. Richard Thompson April 30, 1991 Page 3 ' I hope you found this information informative. We have attempted to give you the most accurate factual data possible and have tried to be forthcoming wherever necessary with explanations since this ' is not an exact science. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this material. Sincerely, Paul Krauss, AICP Director of Planning ' PK:v Enclosure II 1 I 1 111 CITYOF SS 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 , April 23 , 1991 II Mr. Chris Enger , Director of Planning City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3677 Dear Chris: 1 The following comments are in response to your letter of April 9, 1991, and our discussions at today's meeting. I believe that most of the points you raised can be reasonably addressed and, in fact, are in the process of doing so with the Metropolitan Council staff. Where appropriate, additional information is appended to this_ report for your review. You raised approximately 20 points in your letter. As I am sure you are aware, the City is actively working with Metropolitan Council staff to respond to questions that they have raised. It must be stressed, however, that Metropolitan Council staff has, with one notable exception, found our Plan to be unusually well developed and appear to be generally supportive of it. That one exception is, as I am sure you are aware, the significant discrepancy between Mike Munson's regional modeling and City of Chanhassen forecasting efforts. To clarify the issue, you and your City Council should be made aware that the Metropolitan Council has forecasted that Chanhassen would have 10,000 people and 4,500 jobs in the year 2000. The U.S. Census confirms that we have , approximately 12,000 people, while a census of area businesses performed by the City indicates that we have approximately 6,000 jobs, with both sets of information dating to 1990. We have made it clear to Metropolitan Council staff that the only way we could comply with their regional forecast is to put 2,000 people on a bus to South Dakota, which for obvious reasons we have no intention of doing. Therefore, much of our discussions with the Metropolitan Council have focused around means of 'resolving the discrepancy-in the Metropolitan Council forecasts so that they more adequately reflect reality. 1 1 ' Mr. Chris Enger April 23, 1991 Page 2 ' The following is a point-by-point response to the issues raised in your April 9, 1991 letter. I have copied your comments and our response is provided in sequence for the sake of comparison. ' 1. On page 5 under Residential Development it states that residential development currently accounts for 3,912 acres. 1 This number is inconsistent with the acreage figures listed in the land inventory by TAZ chart (4,217 acres) in the land use appendix, and the existing land use figures on page 4 (2, 660) . 1 It is not clear which figures are correct. Response: You point out some apparent inconsistencies in the amount of acreage dedicated to existing land uses. I have 1 been unable to find your quotation of residential development on page 5, since there is no comparable acreage figure quoted on either page 5 of the Population, Households and Employment sections or under the Land Use section. I believe you are using an earlier draft copy of the Plan that was provided, rather than the current draft that was forwarded to the ' Metropolitan Council as well as Eden Prairie. However, let's take this question in more general terms. There are some apparent discrepancies in this Plan and we are currently working to resolve them. These discrepancies stem, for the most part, from the difficulty of planning for a community that is growing as rapidly as we are. I am sure you are familiar with the difficulty of hitting a moving target on matters such as these. The most current figure I can give you is that all land currently in use for residential purposes, both inside and outside the MUSA Line, includes 2,729 acres inside the MUSA Line and 1,090 outside the MUSA Line, for a 1 total of 3,819 acres. This figure includes developed land. The current calculation for vacant residential land is 201 acres of single family and 160 acres of multi-family for a 361 acre total. All of this land is located within the current MUSA Line. We are currently in the process of updating various sections of the Plan to be consistent with these numbers. I am including a copy of tables wherein all land uses have been broken down by TAZs for your analysis. 2. On page 6 under Commercial Development it states that existing commercial uses occupy 163 acres. This number is inconsistent with the acreage figures listed in the land inventory by TAZ chart in the land appendix, which shows 151 acres of ' commercial land developed. Response: Again, I am unable to find the exact citation you 1 are quoting. However, the accurate numbers for commercial development as contained within the documentation provided with this letter includes 119 acres of developed commercial land within the MUSA Line and 34 acres of developed commercial 1 1 Mr. Chris Enger April 23, 1991 Page 3 acres outside the MUSA Line, for a total of 153 acres. , , Metropolitan Council staff has been provided with the most current information. 3 . It is not clear whether Chanhassen is including land that is currently zoned and approved for development, but not built or vacant, in the 612 acres of developed commercial land. If so, the total amount of commercial land currently available for development (213) may actually be greater, consequently, reducing the amount of additional commercial land needed to accommodate future demand. Land approved for development, but not yet built typically accounts for a sizable portion of a communities' vacant land inventory. Many projects that receive city approval never come to fruition, or are not built for several years. This land should be considered vacant developable land. Furthermore, according to a document titled "The City of Chanhassen Available Land for Development", which is currently available to the public through the Chanhassen HRA, there are 216 acres of industrial land available for development (these parcels are shown by legal description) . This contradicts the figures in the Plan amendmeht which states that only 90 acres of industrial land are currently available for development. Response: You quote a figure of 612 acres of developed 1 commercial land. This is not a figure we have used and I am not certain what you are including in this category. We separated commercial land from industrial/office land and I believe you are probably aggregating the two. You correctly point out that there is often land which is committed for development, but which is not ultimately developed for that use. This may become available in the future. As I am sure you have in Eden Prairie, we have some of those situations here as well. We have attempted to diligently identify those parcels to the Metropolitan Council and have worked closely with their staff to keep them apprised of how we made our determination. For example, the McGlynn Bakeries own a significant parcel in Chanhassen, some of which is reserved for their future growth and some of which is on the open market. The 35 acres which are on the open market are included in our vacant land category while the McGlynn site itself is not. The reason for this is that McGlynns have already come in for one expansion, is already working on their second and have approved plans to develop the entire site. You also point out apparent discrepancies between the Comprehensive Plan and a brochure that was prepared by our HRA illustrating sites that were available for development. I regret that there is confusion over some of these properties, i I Mr. Chris Enger April 23, 1991 Page 4 but possibly some of this could be explained. I have obtained a copy of the brochure and understand how you arrived at the ' availability of 216 acres, wherein our Comprehensive Plan currently shows an availability of 96 acres of vacant industrial land. Again, I have the difficulty of hitting a moving target on this one, but I would dispute one or two of the assumptions that were used in the HRA brochure. For example, Redmond Products has a 511 acre site for which plans were being developed last year to relocate the company. They have since retrenched on this plan, but the property is being held by the Redmond family and is not on the market. We may wish this to be available, and would like to interest someone in it, but the fact is that this property is not on the market and is being held by the company. Secondly, there are 28 acres of industrial park property shown in the Ward Estate. With the adoption of our current Comprehensive Plan, this industrial acreage will be converted to residential and some minor commercial uses due to the relocation of Highway 101 through Chanhassen and this site. Thus again, I believe the HRA erred in this since as soon as our Plan is adopted, this land will no longer be available in this category. Similarly, there is one small 4 acre site in our industrial park which has an approved office building which has not yet been constructed. Since I cannot assure you that the project will be developed, this probably falls into the category you have described, but this is a minor amount of land. The final case in point concerns 40 acres which are owned by Sun Link/DataServ. At the time our plan was developed, this land was being held Son ' was not being marketedby Data. ery Calls for to future DataServcorporate indicated expansi that this land would not be developed by anyone but themselves and they would be sitting on it until such time as they could use it. In the last few months, there has recently been some activity ' on this property where 40 acres of it is currently being marketed. Even in this case, however, it is not fully clear. As you may be aware, Southwest Metro Transit is attempting to ' secure some of this area for a Park and Ride facility. The 40 acres could legitimately be added to the 96 acres we indicate as being vacant, fora total vacant availability of 136 acres. I have been working with Metropolitan Council staff to help them get a handle on our employment growth and space demands. ' The current status of this exercise is that Metropolitan Council staff believes we could justify over 1000 acres- of industrial land availability for Chanhassen to satisfy the 10 year growth plus 5 year overage standard of the Metropolitan Council. Chanhassen was extraordinarily conservative in developing land consumption forecasts for both residential and office/industrial growth. Therefore, our Plan proposes to I 1 Mr. Chris Enger i April 23 , 1991 Page 5 bring in a total of 639 acres which includes the 96 acres previously considered to be vacant. Obviously we could have justified a much greater amount of industrial land, but did not feel it was in the best interests of the City. 4 . The residential land demand forecast methodology developed by Chanhassen is confusing. It is not clear how industrial land demand was determined. According to the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework Manual, in order to establish a regional need for increasing the urban service area, the City must demonstrate that their land demand forecasts exceed the total land supply (with overage) within the City's current MUSA. The need for additional residential and industrial land is apparently based on the assumption that growth will continue in Chanhassen through the 1990's at the 1987-1988 level, which were the "peak growth" years in the 1980's in Chanhassen. This does not seem likely, especially when considering the current economic recession and an over- built industrial and office real estate market in the southwest metropolitan area. It appears that Chanhassen's approach for more industrial land is based on large scale user interest. The Plan does not define large scale user. Response: You erroneously state that Chanhassen's growth is based on assumptions that peak growth levels experienced in the 1980's will be perpetuated in the coming decade. Our Plan goes to great lengths to stress that we are in no way projecting that the 10% growth of recent years with a 6% • annualized growth of the last decade is going to be repeated. In fact, the City was so conservative that we assumed a level of 4.75% to 5.5% growth rate was consistent with our expectations. Our land consumption forecasts were based on this presumption. In current discussions with the Metropolitan Council staff, all they are willing to go with at this time is accelerated population growth projections that were contained in the Highway 212 .EIS which was contributed to . by both our communities: Our . land consumption forecasts were so conservative that even with the reduced population projections contained in the Highway 212 EIS, whose accuracy we dispute, we still have not exceeded land availability as calculated by Metropolitan Council staff. 5. Page 10 states that Eden Prairie's ability to satisfy large industrial uses is rapidly diminishing, therefore, increasing demand for industrial land in Chanhassen. As of April, 1990, Eden Prairie had 471 acres of industrial land, and 721 acres of office/commercial land available for all levels of development. This includes large sites that can facilitate 11 ' Mr. Chris Enger April 23, 1991 • Page 6 ' major campus style developments or corporate headquarters, land that is currently supported by utilities and transportation infrastructure. This is not a valid method of ' defining need for industrial land. Response: We in no way meant to slight Eden Prairie in terms ' of your land availability, nor did we include any figures regarding same in our Plan. We do know, however, that a number of developers and property brokers have been telling us ' that our new MUSA expansion does present possibilities for development that do not currently exist in Eden Prairie. In any case, we are not trying to justify our development based upon your land availability or lack of availability. We are simply trying to justify what is reasonable and rational and in the best interests of our community and hopefully our region. ' 6. Since the Metropolitan Council 's growth forecasts fall short of those described in Chanhassen's Plan, we expect that this area would receive lower priority for investment in regional ' facilities than areas within the MUSA as stated in the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework (MDIF) . The MDIF states that "the Council will place its highest priority ' on serving existing development within the urban service area by maintaining and replacing investments already in place" . Adding more industrial land to the MUSA in Chanhassen would ' not be consistent with Council policies on utilizing existing development infrastructure, especially when there is over 1, 100 acres of industrial and commercial land with utilities ' and currently available for development in Eden Prairie. Response: My understanding of our meeting this morning is that this section will be deleted recognizing that Chanhassen ' is not looking for any new investment in regional facilities and that Chanhassen has already paid for its share of the cost of in place sewer capacity. 7. Chanhassen's 1990 estimated full time employment (5,079) is based on a ' City survey that is not present in the Plan. ' Although we agree that employment is difficult to forecast, in doing so, the base employment estimate should be firmly established. Since the Council uses the Minnesota Jobs and Training estimated covered employment data for their ' employment estimates by city, we assume Chanhassen's • employment estimate will be 'weighed against the Council estimate. Response: We have been working closely with Metropolitan Council staff for over one year on our employment data. Metropolitan Council staff acknowledges that the data that 1 Mr. Chris Enger ' April 23 , 1991 Page 7 they received from the state is highly erroneous as it comes to Chanhassen. For example, they do not include the over 1,286 jobs that are located within the portion of Chanhassen contained within Hennepin County. In addition, their data is only current to the first quarter of 1989. I am appending a copy of our employment survey for your review. Chanhassen's employment survey is not an estimate, it is a count, whereas the Metropolitan Council estimate is simply wrong. Metropolitan Council staff has been able to acknowledge this point and I am sure that after reviewing the attached data you will too. 8 . Chanhassen's future employment calculations were done by multiplying the current jobs per acre ratio of 8.3, by 1,379, the total land vacant and designated for commercial and industrial development (including 554 acres outside current MUSA) . It does not appear that public land (not including park/floodplain) was included in calculating the jobs/acre ratio. If some of the 5,079 employees estimated in Chanhassen are public, i.e. government, school, post office, etc. , a more accurate ratio could be attained by including this land in the calculation. Response: We have been very careful in explaining to Council staff that we have eliminated only large lakes and DNR identified wetlands from our land calculations. Since Chanhassen already essentially has a no net-loss wetland protection program, there is a large amount of inefficiency that is normal in our development process. As to your position that public land, including schools and post offices should be included on our industrial land categories, I cannot follow the reasoning. Possibly you have situations in Eden Prairie where a large percentage of your employment is public sector, but we do not in Chanhassen. 9. Page 11 states that the location of light rail transit (LRT) through Chanhassen may promote development in undeveloped ' areas of the City. Although this may be true, LRT will most likely not be built through Chanhassen for 20-30 years. Response: We operate from the same information as you do and , fully well understand that LRT is not expected to come to our area for at least 20 years. In no way do we have any expectations riding on this and the sentence you referred to really implies that the LRT corridor that was selected runs through the southernmost part of Chanhassen. This area is not included in any current MUSA Line request. In 15 or 20 years I when development is proposed, light rail, if it runs through this area, could be of benefit. I Mr. Chris Enger April 23, 1991 Page 8 10. There is no indication of the current number of subsidized housing projects/units in Chanhassen or the future number of ' units. Response: Your issues 10-14 relate to Housing concerns that appear to be identical to those which were raised by Housing ' staff at the Metropolitan Council. As to why there is no current count of subsidized housing units in Chanhassen, the simple answer is that there are none. We do have individuals ' with rent subsidies but no designated units. At this point, there are few, if any, resources to utilize to obtain this housing but the Metropolitan Council is aware that the City would be willing to look into any suggestions or programs. ' 11. There is no indication of existing or future City initiated programs to assist first time home buyers, rehabilitate or ' maintain the existing housing stock, or assist in the financing of low income rental family or elderly housing projects. ' Response: The City did maintain a program to assist home rehabilitation using Block Grant funds and the program was so under utilized that it was dropped. As for our elderly, Chanhassen is becoming very innovative for a community our size and has a new Senior Commission that is actively pursuing these issues. Housing is currently the subject of a City ' sponsored feasibility study. 12. Although Chanhassen has identified an existing shortage of ' rental or first time ownership housing, it does not identify how it will accommodate this shortage. Chanhassen will have limited opportunity to provide affordable rental housing since only 6.3% of their total residential land (including proposed ' MUSA expansion area) is designated for multiple family residential development. It appears as if Chanhassen will have few alternatives to single family detached housing, although the Plan claims to provide a variety of housing types, 81% of the City's current inventory (8-31-89) is single family detached units. ' Response: We believe that we have in fact provided ample opportunities for this type of housing. The Metropolitan Council Housing Planner, in commenting on our Plan, notes that ' Eden Prairie has a large vacancy in rental units and suggests that this might not be an appropriate time for Chanhassen to develop these since this could adversely affect your ' community. 13 . There seems to be a real deficiency in the supply of affordable/subsidized housing in Chanhassen. Although the Mr. Chris Enger April 23 , 1991 Page 9 Plan contains goals and policies stating the need for affordable housing, it lacks a clear strategy on how these goals will be implemented. There are not funding sources identified for the development of subsidized housing projects. Response: We share your concerns in this area and are frustrated with a lack of viable options. However, we are finding that, just as was the case in Eden Prairie, the increasingly restricted supply of land is raising housing costs and the MUSA Line amendment will be a direct benefit. 14. The need for affordable housing (rental/ownership) in Chanhassen will be compounded by the conversion of 600 acres of rural land to industrial by potentially generating thousands of manufacturing/assembly jobs (which are typically lower paying positions) . It does not appear that the City is accommodating future housing demand from low/moderate income persons who work in Chanhassen but cannot afford to live . there. Response: I concur with your sentiments that a community should strive to develop a mix of housing, particularly so that people who work in a community can live in a community. Both Eden Prairie and Chanhassen suffer from problems in this area wherein many of those who work in manufacturing jobs cannot afford to live in our communities. I would suggest that Chanhassen does have several large relatively modest cost housing subdivisions currently being built, which help to alleviate this problem. However, again, if you have some suggestions on what Eden Prairie is doing that might work in Chanhassen, I would be happy to hear them. 15. There are some inconsistencies in the functional classifications on border routes. In particular, the roadway shown as a minor arterial - Class II on the north side of Lake Riley is not compatible with our system. Eden Prairie plans for a roadway that would provide for the continuity of this alignment, however, our classification is a residential collector (32 ' wide) with a traffic volume under 5000 ADT (2010) . Another inconsistency of lesser importance is that Dell Road (south of TH 5) is defined as a minor arterial in Eden Prairie and as a collector in Chanhassen. 16. The traffic projections shown in the Eastern Carver County , Transportation Planning Study indicates that the CSAH 1/ Pioneer Trail corridor is under' utilized (especially in the capacity restraint model - Figure 4) in comparison to the roadway north of Lake Riley. In addition, Figure 9 (2010 Traffic Forecast by City) shows a significant difference in 1 ' Mr. Chris Enger April 23, 1991 Page 10 ' the forecast volume for Pioneer Trail than what is shown on Figure 3. 17 . We agree that TH 101 between CSAH 62 and TH 5 should be classified as a minor arterial - Class II with Dell Road in Eden Prairie having a functional classification no higher than ' a collector facility. In addition, any improvements planned for TH 101 should provide some continuity through Chanhassen and be designed to accommodate the projected volumes. 18. Chanhassen's traffic projections for TH 5 are higher than Eden Prairie's projections which indicate that they are anticipating growth that significantly exceeds the traffic ' capacity of the trunk highway facilities provided by MnDOT. Response to points 15-18: You raise a number of points that ' refer back to the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study. I have spoken to you about this study on several occasions in the past and as you are aware, this was a joint effort by a ' number of Carver County communities along with the County Transportation Department. At several times in the past you have implied that the traffic we find coming out of Chanhassen through Eden Prairie is all Chanhassen's doing. Nothing could ' be further from the truth. The Eastern Carver County Study was designed to reflect the development intentions of a number of communities, much of which passes through Chanhassen as ' well. It was designed to be a document that would produce the kinds of discussions that would hopefully answer or respond to the issues that you have raised, which I agree are valid. You ' are correct, the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study does project significantly higher volumes on the number of roads that had been projected in previous models developed by the Metropolitan Council. There are obvious answers to this ' and that is that the Metropolitan Council was wrong on population, they were wrong on employment and they are also wrong on traffic. As you are aware, I made this study ' available to you during your recent MUSA Line request. Follow-up meetings in this area are certainly warranted with both yourself, the Metropolitan Council, MnDOT and Hennepin ' County along with those agencies participating in the Eastern Carver County Study. 19. The hydraulic capacities of the Red Rock Interceptor and allocations to serve communities should be confirmed by MWCC. These capacities are not present in the Plan. ' 20. There is a significant gap in the year 2000 treatment plant capacity currently allocated to Chanhassen by MWCC, and Chanhassen's projected year 2000 flow. It would appear that • Mr. Chris Enger , April 23, 1991 Page 11 Chanhassen's planned growth will demand more sewer capacity than what will be allocated by MWCC. Response to points 19 and 20: You raised concerns with the availability of public sewer. This issue was explored in our Plan and has been the subject of an intensive effort between Chanhassen and the MWCC over the span of the last year. In addition, as you are aware, Chanhassen has been working on some of the issues that were raised by the recent MUSA Line amendment in Eden Prairie relative to Chanhassen's sanitary sewer availability. Chanhassen will clearly be exceeding the flows that were provided by the Metropolitan Council Systems Statement. The reason for this again is obvious in that the Systems Statement told us that we would have 2,000 people less 10 years from now than we do today. However, you can be assured that we have confirmed with the MWCC that there is adequate capacity to handle our projected development without any impact at all on Eden Prairie or other communities using the same facilities. I am enclosing a recent memorandum from our consultant to address information requirements by Metropolitan Council staff. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on these items. You should note that we deleted our comments on Question #6 based upon our agreement this morning that Eden Prairie would not seek to limit Chanhassen's growth based upon land availability within your community. Should you revise other sections of your -letter, we would appreciate being copied so that we may accordingly alter our other responses. We look forward to working with you on these and other matters in the future. , Sincerely, i Paul Krauss, AICP ' Director of Planning - PK:k ' .. 1 _ _ Il - Chaska , ...._,_ Ili . . vii- • II April 26, 1991 1 II Mr. Paul Krauss, AICP I Director of Planning 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: CHASKA STAFF REVIEW OF CHANHASSEN'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE • • Dear Paul : I Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the update of Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan that was forwarded to my office. I The updated version of Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan appears to be generally thorough and well prepared. Chaska staff reviewed the document as it relates to the goals and objectives of the City of Chaska and its II Comprehensive Plan which are currently being updated. • In general , Chanhassen's plan appears to be consistent with Chaska's plans. No major future trouble spots were observed. A summary of the Iitems that deserve mention is presented below. 2000 Land Use Plan Map I The Land Use Plan map shows the 2000 MUSA line being extended westerly to the Chaska City limits north of Lyman Boulevard. Almost all of the land adjacent to Chaska's northeast boundary is designated office/industrial. II Chaska's idea of a greenbelt at the City's edge will be difficult to achieve with this land use classification. The land south of Lyman Boulevard and east of C.R. 17 remains in the rural II service area but is designated as "1995 Study AreaTM. Chanhassen's plan - states that when future T.H. 212 is constructed, significant development pressures will be placed on this area. It may be possible to work with II Chanhassen to achieve some level of greenbelt within this area. Future T.H. 212, of course, will create a new east entrance to the City. RECEIVED 11 APR 2 9 1991 VI FY OF CHANHASSEN II City Of ChaSka hr" nnesota One City Hall Plaza 55318-1962 1 Phone 612'448-2851 Mr. Paul Krauss April 26, 1991 Page 2 1 Land Use Page 16 The document states that "the location of the industrial development in ' Chaska creates a magnet for the future extension of Chanhassen's indus- trial/office area." This statement appears to be inconsistent with the plan map because an ' existing and proposed future residential enclave exists between the existing industrial areas in Chanhassen and Chaska. Natural Features Page 11 Chanhassen apparently feels that the entire City will eventually be urbanized. The report states that the City has no goal to preserve agricultural use on a permanent long-term basis. Transportation The recommended roadway system shows a collector street system within the southeast quadrant of Highways 5 and 51 which would connect to existing 82nd Street. When this area develops, Chaska should participate in selecting the detailed alignment of such collector streets so that the , interests of Arbor Park are served. The potential for a new T.H. 41 crossing of the Minnesota River is men- tioned on pages 24 and 30, but the corridor at the common boundary of Chaska and Chanhassen is not indicated on Chanhassen's proposed roadway system map. Metro Council requires this future corridor to be shown on local Comprehensive Plans since it is part of the future metropolitan highway system. Recreation Chanhassen proposed a trail on C.R. 17 between Pioneer Trail and Lyman Boulevard along the common boundary of the two cities. This is consistent with Chaska's ultimate trail system plan. Provision of.the trail should be undertaken in conjunction with upgrading of C.R. 17. Sewer and Water Pages 6 and 8, 17 and 18: The document indicates that Chaska's Waste Water Treatment Plant will reach its design capacity in the mid-1990's, and that both Chaska and Chanhassen strongly recommend that the MWCC study the means of providing services to the City of Chaska and the area south of Lyman Boulevard in.Chanhassen. The options of either plant expansion or construction of a new interceptor are identified. While the possibility of Chanhassen's Bluff Creek area being served by the , Chaska plant is not specifically mentioned, the inference is that the option should be studied. Obviously, the Chaska Treatment Plant capacity issue is extremely important to the City of Chaska relative to its ability to support continued development in the City. This concern should be made- very clear to the Metro Council and MWCC as part of Chaska's review of Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan. , I Mr. Paul Krauss April 26, 1991 Page 3 11 ' Summary/Conclusion - It appears that the two most significant issues in Chanhassen's Comprehen- sive Plan update relative to Chaska are: . 1. Extending the MUSA line to Chaska's northeast City limits which in effect joins Chaska to the greater metro area for the first time. The designation and function of Chaska as a Free-Standing Growth Center appears to be jeopardized. 2. The second significant issue relates to the ability of Chaska to ' support continued urban development within the 1990's. While the Chaska Waste Water Treatment Plant is an MWCC facility, the City's Free- Standing Growth Center status includes a commitment by Metro Council to provide necessary public facilities to support normal growth. ' The City's comments have been forwarded to the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. ' Again, thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on your plan. We look forward to working with you in the future on these and other matters. Sincerely, Shirley Bruers, Community Development Director SB:jai 1 1 1 1 I . 1 I I