The URL can be used to link to this page

HRA 1985 10 16(v TENTATIVE AGENDA JOINT CITY COUNCIL /HRA /PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 16, 1985 7:00 P.M. 1. Overview, City Manager. 2. Report Presentations: a. Metropolitan Council Resolution, Lake Ann Interceptor - Dick Nowlin. b. Development Framework Process - Fred Hoisington. C. HRA Transportation /Broadened Study Area: 1) Status Report of Study - Fred Hoisington 2) Expanded Study Area - Jim Benshoof. 3. Discussion /Seek Concensus - Mayor Hamilton: a. Response to Metropolitan Council - Lake Ann. b. Direction to Hoisington /Staff - Development Framework Process. C. Direction to /from HRA: 1) Broadened Study Area 2) Re- analysis of Highway 212 Intersections CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council /Commissioners FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: October 9, 1985 SUBJ: Purpose and Intent, Joint Planning Commission /HRA/ City Council Meeting, October 16, 1985 The Planning Commission, Housing and Redevelopment Authority and City Council each have specific legal responsibilities under state statutes, i.e. the Planning-Commission is legally responsible for preparing and holding hearings regarding proposed or amended zoning and subdivision ordinances. A final decision regarding Planning Commission recommendations are the legal responsibility of the City Council. Similarly, only the City Council can enter into legally binding contracts for the City. Planning and implementation of redevelopment activities are the legal responsibilities of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority - subject to approval and authorized funding by the.City Council. At the current time, we are at a point where actions by the Council /Commissions can significantly affect the activities of the other two groups. The purpose of this evening's meeting is to discuss the current status of each of our activities and attempt to reach a concensus as to directions each group should be taking to insure consistency with the other group. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 - MEMORANDUM TO: City Council /Commissioners FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: October 9, 1985 SUBJ: Report Presentations The following reports are proposed to be presented: a. Metropolitan Council Resolution, Lake Ann Interceptor - Dick Nowlin. b. Development Framework Process - Fred Hoisington. C. HRA Transportation /Land Use Study: 1) Status Report of Study - Fred Hoisington 2) Expanded Study Area - Jim Benshoof. I would ask that each of the consultants /staff members be allowed to make their presentation without going through a question and answer period. I have asked each to hold their presentations to 5 -10 minutes. By allowing each report to follow the previous one, it is our belief that the Commissions /Council can readily see commonality that exist between all of the presentations. Again, I would ask your indulgence while each of the consultants make their summary reports. CITY OF c�' CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: October 7, 1985 SUBJ: Systems Committee Meeting, Lake Ann /Lake Virginia Alternatives The Systems Committee officially heard the public hearing com- ments on Monday, September 30th. A final decision is anticipated in the near future. The Metropolitan Council staff report outlining the alternatives was no different than anticipated - they continue to favor the Lake Virginia alternative (copy of report attached). The report is primarily being written by the Development Framework staff who had little or no knowledge of what had transpired on this project for the past several years. As a result, the testimony and report given by Development Framework staff was incorrect, incon- sistent, and generally not well thought through, i.e. during the presentation by Metropolitan staff, the point was brought out that "The alignment of the forcemain along Pleasant View through the Near Mountain property was merely presented as a concept. Chanhassen /Near Mountain /Christmas Lake owners need not be con- cerned because we really did not intend for this to be the final alignment. Presently, we are proposing that the alignment be within the right -of -way of Highway 7. we were only trying to demonstrate the concept and are still seeking Council approval for the concept with our responsibility then being to determine the final alignment." System Committee members did not buy the above arguments at all. Costs, timing and thoughts of a new feasibility report, were all subjects brought up by System Committee members. The big blow came when System Committee members asked the MWCC engineers if they had seen this proposal with their response being "No one asked us if it would be feasible ". The same question was asked of the engineering firm who did the feasibility study for the two alignments. He responded "We looked at the Highway 7 alignment more than two years ago. There are too many bridges, intersec- tions, street crossings and marshlands to even consider Mayor and Council October 7, 1985 Page 2 that alternative. It simply is not an option ". Finally, when System Committee members asked both the Waste Control Commission engineers and the consultant whether it was possible to achieve a 508 reduction in Chanhassen's I /I, both responded that no more than 20% could reasonably be achieved. Again, the development framework staff was not prepared for their presentation. The work done by Dick Nowlin /Don Brauer has been expensive. However, the September 30th meeting was a clear indication that System Committee members were knowledgeable of our concerns and positions. Don Brauer is liked by System Committee members as he analyzes issues in a very common sense method. It is Don's com- ments which are included in the margin of the attached staff report. I thought you might enjoy reading some of these as you go through the report itself. A decision on this item will be made (hopefully) prior to our joint meeting scheduled for October 16th. Dick Nowlin will pre - sent the System Committee decision at that time. Staff Update (10- 10 -85) The final draft of the resolution has not yet been received by the City. I will attempt to have Dick Nowlin direct mail this document to you. / 0/7 RECEIVED September 27, 1985 SEP 3 0 1985 WEEK OF SEPT. 30 - OCT. 4 C11 y yr ,ANhAC,SEN NOTE: This publication contains a one -week list of meetings and agenda items for the Metropolitan Council, its standing committees and advisory committees, as well as similar information for the Regional Transit Board, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission. Meetings and agendas occasionally must be changed. To verify the meeting schedule in advance, call 291 -6464. Media should continue to call Ken Reddick, 291 -6422, or Lynna Williams, 291 -6511. Regional Transit Board - Monday, Sept. 30, 4 p.m., Council Chambers. The board will hear reports on the 1986 exurban program guidelines, the Minnesota Department of Transportation project development report and environmental assessment for Washington Av. S., and the Taxicab Advisory Committee. It will also consider resolutions on its 1985 property tax levy and on a personnel consultant. Metropolitan Systems Committee - Monday, Sept. 30, 4 p.m., Conference Room E. The committee will hear a briefing on the Aviation Policy Plan. It also will discuss the public hearing comments on an amendment to Part 1 of the Water Resources Management Guide that provides for flow reallocation to eight western Lake Minnetonka area communities, and a summary of public hearing comments and staff response to the Lake Ann /Lake Virginia amendment to the Sewer Policy Plan. Metropolitan Systems Committee - Monday, Sept. 30, 7 p.m., Council Chambers. The Council will hold a public hearing on the revised Recreation Open Space Development Guide /Policy Plan. Minority Issues Advisory Committee - Tuesday, Oct. 1, 4 p.m., Council Chambers. The committee will discuss the 1986 "Regional Citizen of the Year" selection process, and be briefed on Council housing planning activities. It also will will address some procedural matters and hear various subcommittee reports. Transportation Advisory Board's Technical Advisory Committee - Wednesday, Oct. 2, 9 a.m., Council Chambers. The committee will consider transit needs assessment, and the metropolitan significance review of the proposed Mall of America /Fantasyworld project in Bloomington. It also will hear various agency and committee reports. Environmental Resources Committee - Wednesday, Oct. 2, 4 p.m., Conference Room E. The committee will act on the Flying Cloud Landfill expansion permit application, the household rebate to cities and towns component of the landfill abatement cost recovery program, and a proposed amendment to the Hennepin County resource recovery environmental impact statement scoping document. Chair's Advisory Committee - Wednesday, Oct. 2, 7:30 p.m., Council Chambers. The committee will discuss the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework. Metropolitan River Corridors Study Committee - Thursday, Oct. 3, 12:30 p.m., Conference Room E. Metropolitan and Community Development Committee - Thursday, Oct. 3, 1:30 p.m., Council Chambers. The committee will consider results of the public hearing and comment period on revisions to the Council's housing bond plan review guid -4�ine§r lihite Bear Township comprehensive plan revisions in response to review recommendations; a Savage plan amendment on land use change in the Savage Fen area; and applications for Section 8 housing vouchers. It also will continue discussion of the structure of the Council's Metropolitan Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Management Committee - Thursday, Oct. 3, 3 p.m., Council Chambers. The committee will act on approval of collateral for investments, a request for contract approval for distribution of the Metro Monitor, and determination of the Minneapolis tax requirement for 1986. It also will discuss staffing history in planner classifications. Metropolitan Systems Committee - Friday, Oct. 4, 9 a.m., Council Chambers. The committee will discuss the Aviation Policy Plan and implementation guidelines. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 MEETING NOTICE METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS COMMITTEE Monday, September 30, 1985 4 p.m. Room E TENTATIVE AGENDA 1. Aviation Briefing -- Policy Plan Update. - Discussion Mark Ryan 2. Amendment to Part 1, Water Resources Management Guide Providing for Flow Reallocation to Eight Western Lake Minnetonka Area Communities - Response to Public Hearing Comments. - Discussion Marcel Jouseau 3. Lake Ann /Lake Virginia Amendment to Sewer Policy Plan- - Summary of Public Hearing Comments and Staff Response. - Discussion Marcel Jouseau 4. Adjourn. / RECEI JED $EP 3 01985 CITY .OF. CHANHASSEN Carol Flynn, Chair PLEASE NOTE THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARIN METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 DATE: September 25, 1985 TO: Metropolitan Systems Committee FROM: Mazanec, Burandt, Byers, Werner, Jouseau SUBJECT: Lake Ann /Lake Virginia Amendment to Sewer Policy Plan -- Summary of Public Hearing Comments and Staff Response On July 19, 1985, the Metropolitan Council sent to the Metropolitan Area communities a proposed sewer policy plan amendment outlining two alternative methods of providing additional sewer service to communities in the western Lake Minnetonka area (in Sewer Service Area 4). On Aug. 29, 1985, the Council held a public hearing in Chanhassen to receive comments on the two alternatives. The hearing record was kept open until Sept. 13. The comments received at the hearing and following the hearing have been summarized and are shown together with a staff reponse in the attached report. The schedule for action on the Lake Ann /Lake Virginia interceptor issue laid out last July calls for Council action on Oct. 10 J. The Metropolitan Systems Committee is scheduled to review the hearing comments and the staff response on Sept. 30 and to take action on the staff recommendation on the sewer alternative at its meeting on Oct. 7. JL3028- PHENV2 09.25.85 '� DU6J, T),'- ay" �ex t�a�►t sixth -a�-'� (2ax'l__ cep me he t' - I_ "c_tS2 T3 p Sn?/rnL �ew SOCt. hii 4� il,- -W -Zt5U 0 - shcA DXt- L" sue., dtt-5 Phi , %P�feu 1 September 24, 1985 Some 17 governmental units, businesses, organizations and individuals testified at the public hearing. Subsequent to that hearing numerous individuals and businesses sent letters. The comments received and the staff responses are organized in this report in the following order: - Development Framework and Growth Management Issues - Cost of Sewer Alternatives and Funding Participation - Provision of Sewer Service - Environmental Concerns - Impact on Existing Development tai DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ISSUES �I Comment: The Lake Ann alternative is consistent with and supportive of localI puns and development; it has been used in local planning decisions since the late 1960s. The Lake Virginia alternative is unplanned and in conflict with existing and planned development. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) gn Response: As early as 1976 the cities were informed that phases II and III of b !i the Lake Ann interceptor were not being Dlannpd for in either the Council's sewer policy -p an or tn"L- ttropoIitan Waste Control Commission's (MWCC) devel- opment program. The Council took this position in response to Chanhassen's request that sewer service be provided to the city via the upstream portion of elpke Ann-interceptor. Alternatives to the Lake Ann gravity interceptor have been under study ever since, beginning with the 201 water quality study of he late 1970s and continuing to the present debate over whether to amend the Water Resources Management Policy Plan. "Reconsideration of sewer service options since 1976 have largely been triggered by the adoption of the Council's Development Framework plan in 1975. Although the Council recognizes the need for local governments to make urban service and land use decisions based on assnmD ions about the orovicinn a+ropol9t sewer s rvi a it has been clear since the inception of the Land Planning Act i� about 10 years ago that the need for a method of future sewer service to Chanhassen and Eden Prairie was open to substantial questioning. yts_ e It is not at all surprising that the cities' favored solution is consistent g� VA with the concepts of hi h rowth planning era. But the development then lOtif;,a, Y nvisione as not come about and di ferent plans are now needed for the more Yom% likely event of slower rowth rates. Hence, 1960's expectations are no longer do relevant. While the Lake / e ock alternativ may a compatible with local_ ,,fe planning concepts, it is otly Dom atible wit regional Planning. It is ��} a major service investment that make col' ' � future need _ It would provide sewer ��Jt plans and controls cited do not call vl` ' future. rtant assum tions about uncertain �� n vice capacity within an area w ere the r"f - such service for a long time in the JP In addition, key elements'of both cities' comprehensive K P plans have not been found to be supportive bf regional plans and policies. In some cases ocal plans have been inadequate. Neither community has an uP-io -date sewer �[ plan that has been revised to reflect its comprehensive plan prepare j� Land Planning Act, for example. In other cases the local plans hays inconsistent. Examples of inconsistencies include growth forecasts urban service area, and rural area densities. As noted above, times changed; the old plans are no longer consistent with the realities o growth rates for the region and this area in particular. The Lake Virginia /Riley Cree Iternative is a new solution for a new situati i �fG"iy Ill : vj=�cNr_c="J=/VJ VV /LSMle/ v S/ Comment: Nei er the evelopment Framework nor future population pro are critical factors in making this sewer service facility ecisi alternatives will produce surplus sewer Premature expansion of the Metropolitan and Eden Prairie are fully committed to t Y on. under the been size of have - �:/ s mower P1hiuS � ections Both cavn y but neither will cause a Urban Service Area (MUSA). Chanhassen the Metropolitan Development Framework. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) lies onset The first question the Council must address is the ` ` .radiona need for the acility. Fore'usts_ are a crucial /element in determining (� geed and a basic assumption in facility design. AiiFough long -term forecasts -,*e.7 corresponding to the life of metro facilities are very uncertain, the 5{}- Council's most recent forecasts do not show a need for a metropolitan facility d' to serve multi - community needs upstream of Eden Prairie until well into the 21st century, even with Optimistic )growth assumptions. W2OK_)Q — gv duf- co rrC wait Secondly, the Lake Ann gravity interceptor raises important p growth management issues which are at the heart of the Development Framework purpose. This alter______), native lies partly outside the present MUSA and has a designated service area substantially larger than the MUSA in this area. There is no demonstrated s regional need to locate a facilit outside the precon+ MHCA �- / nee tLo expand the potential service areas until so j� 2000. The Lake Ann ravit alternativ contradicts Policies regarding provision of metro sy tems a u the MUSA and promotion of a pattern of urbanizat'on orderl and economic expansion of metro systems f r avoi s premature ur anization. It also contradict Resources Management Policy Plan regarding programm based on Development Framework timing, location and to local plans approved by the Council. or i s t ere a ime well after the vear C�i��! ban services only within i that allows gfficient, [ forecasted growth, and that the Council's Water ng metro sewer services ize criteria and according While it is correct that both alternatives produce surplus sewer apacity, the Lake Virginia forcemain alternative has the advantage of being located wa1L wi�'thin the present and expected future MUSA and not having a service area design associated with it that goes beyond the present MUSA. Consequently, the growth management system needed to support the Lake Virginia forcemain alter- -, native is much more simple and straightforward to establish because it does not contradict Council policies on facility location and service area needs. m a Development Framework standpoint, the Lake Virginia alternative is referred �� :ause it would solve the immediate problem, provide enough regiona er )acity for 37 years, and not directly expand the MUSA prematurely.vOZPd '3(AST PLMV CWO&)6, 0 ,4LJ 01 pRi b pju-moo u f 6VA7 ; 7 Lastly, strong and comprehensive local growth management programs are in / u1f' lace to assure future local actions consistent with regional plans and Policies. It is very commendable and encouraging that both Eden Prairie and Chanhassen are fully committed to the Development Framework. No local lan amendments addressin th0rowth management concerns "raised by the Counci have been forthcoming, however. Key .elements of local growth management systems that were not co ereedro are ser out of date were noted in presentations when the Council considered this matter in April 1984 and were outlined again when reconsidered in June 1985. In late June 1985, a staff letter detailed five points for each community which needed to be addressed to resolve these concerns. The five points to be.addressed area esi nation of a year 2000 urban service area a 79 commitment not to exceed a Council's year 2 0 sewer flow allocation rural3 area residentia ensities consistent with the Development Framework,¢1on -site _ sewer regulations consis ent with Policy and Procedure of the Water esources Man P i n implementation o an up -to- ate sewer lan aRproved by the MWCC. Altho gh staff -to -staff discussion have proqrLssec th quite W 1.1, forma oca pan amendments are nec�es� to firmly resolve the issues and to implement local commitments. Both cities are advised to submit comprehensive plan amendments t res these five points. Plan amendments are necessary to make the local planning commitments a matter of official city policy. A plan amendment from each city AL-L entail the following: 1) redesi natin the present 1990 MUSA year 2000 2) incorporation of interim near sew r 7 e I motor Eden Prairie and 1 1F a c n of 4 3 Chanhassen 3) incorporation of rural area ensity standards of one unit per 10 acres in general rural areas and one unit per 40 acres in agricultural rural access, 4) description of current on- site sewer ordinance provision pertaining to the relevant requirements of the Council's Water Quality Management guidelines, and 5) approval of an updated sewer plan by the MWCC. IorsueterminMnDg forecasts because theytarebdirect factors for locating facilities and sizing them. Chanhassen's and Eden Prairie's commitment to the MY is of reflected in the adp to For example, since Chanhassen s loco d local plans ., 7 the lot size in the rural area from a onenperstenvdensditytto a�2- 1 /2s acre ulot -Size. Inis was done wi ou an amendment to the ocal plan; this increases the gap between local and regional objectives. Chanhassen has said that it will adopt certain controls, but it has n_ot vet done all the things stated in recent letters. The city council has not acted on these items and there is no OV, t that they will. Comment: The MUSA is unaffected by either alternative. The Land Planning Act requires local compliance with metropolitan systems capacity allocations established by the Council. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) Response: Staff�es. Legal counsel has advised that it is i n �/ capacity, not usage allocated fora iven time period, that controls in such (� si ua ions.— aced on this interpretation, it is guestionab a under the La e qi�,r, Ann gravity interceptor alternative whether the and Planning Act would provide adequate assurance that premature expansion of the MUSA could be managed as effectively as the cities' comments indicate. The Land Planning Act is based n'bntrolled "use of metropolitan systems, not oo keeping the MUSA in scale c� with forecas eckneeds. �n2 '�iut r�fz WT' 1 al� off' «1111 _ 1 ' h6 I support to do so. Ex it is ver a is a bur en for all tax a r in h and wastes money that is nee ed for�mo— rimportant current projects. he purpose of the growth guidance system is to match services to develop ent and thereby avoid wasting m ey on excess capacity beyond reasonable fo casts of need. Comment: Chanhassen and Eden Prairie are firmly committed to present and futur compliance with Development Framework and the metropolitan growth guidance system. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) %Who wA& tf5o ? J Res on The commitments made at the hearing and in separate letters are indeed excellent and most en The difficul t! task of formally going through the plan amendment process remains to be done, however. The commitments to date need to be reviewed through the local, public review process and then officially submitted as comprehensive plan amendments before the commitments can be considered final and binding. Comment: The Chanhassen statement of Aug. 28, 1985, states that the city has an adequate on -site sewage system ordinance and intends to implement an up-to- date CSP. (Chanhassen) {p ad Response: Chanhassen has a full range of on -site sewage disposal system regu- lations consistent with the Council's Water Resources Manaqement Development Guide chapter, provided the city adopts 10- d 40 -acre lot requirements in - not >their rural service area. Chanhassen does not ave an approved CSP and will 56/ need to have an approved plan before additional sewer service is provided. COST OF SEWER ALTERNATIVES AND FUNDING PARTICIPATION Comment: The communities of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie, as indicated by emitter, are willing to contribute a percentage of the cost in order to build the Lake Ann alternative. The estimate is that the direct capital cost they would be willing to pay is $2 million. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) Response: The two cities wish to base their percentage on a formula described in a Metropolitan Council - Metropolitan Waste Control Commission staff memo of y April 5, 1985. They also wish to make their contribution when the prgJect is py completed and they can use it. That will be approximately in 1988. In the ^� ? case of Chanhassen it is not cle r whether they will pay when the project is done or when they decide to hook u to the pipe. Staff has two problems with the proposals from the cities: p Cl( First, since the formula cited has n t been com letel discussed with the Council, basing any agreement on this specific f rmu a needs to be discussed with the Council. The Council needs to decide i�the wil' a IS hW percentage based on that formula. Sept ? �� J I(r Second is the matter of when the communities pay. The total difference in the two alternatives is approximately $4 million. That mount is in Iresent value" M01t terms. In order for the two communities to make the MWCC "break even" (i.e. M01AGY not pay any more than Lake Virginia would cost) on the Lake Ann alternative, the would t a he MWCC $4 million on the day the project begins. Their offer, as we n erpret it, is to pay $2,050,000 in 1988. The present /N, U value of that amount, using the same assumptions we have used throughout this 1{�jJ analysis, is approximately $1,900,000. If Chanhassen wishes to contribute in r� some year other than 1988, then the present value of the contribution would be even less. _ ��' "�-L' �� .� � �r,� 4 ' F J}�at uo 6L AU d-40 In those cases where metro sewer system capacity is subs /an�ally in excess of demonstrated need during the planning period, the Council cannot demonstrate an adverse system impact when a local government wants to expand its service area beyond what the Development Framework finds reasuahlel A system impact could potentially be demonstrated only if at full development that area would gener- ate sewer flows in excess of the design capacity. Although proposals to expand the MUSA could potentially exceed interim flow allocations and violate Devel- opment Framework scale standards, they would not necessarily affect the sewer system adversely. Hence, no plan modification could be required in such a situation accordin to legal counsel. This is especially true if the spon- soring local governmen agrees to adhere to the current flow allocation for the interim period even while- expanding the potential service area. In such situations in the past like in Woodbury, the local government can vastly �y versize its urban service area in terms of allocated capacity as long as it does not potentially exceed design capacity when the area develops Available excess capacity has been the number one basis utilized by proponents of MUSA expansion. MC approval of MWCC Development Programs for new facilities Pro is one of the most important measures available to the Council for controlling MUSA expansion and preventing wholesale enlargement. The cities' comments mi this growth management tool. The cities' comments also suggest that metropol- itan agencies have regulatory powers to control subdivision of land in rural areas and operation of on -site sewer systems. As the Council's recent experi- ences with mobile home parks in the rural service area amply indicate, the Council has very little control of development in rural area. The Council certainly has no regulatory powers. Comment: Growth and development in Chanhassen and Eden Prairie complies with the Metropolitan Development Framework. Most new development at urban densities has occurred within the MUSA. Sewage volumes from the cities are within their allocated 1990 capacities. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) i� try at by and large recent development is occurring in a manner consistent with the Development Framework and that actual sewer flows are within allocated amounts. Up to now, however, there has not been an issue of building a metro sewer facility outside the MUSA. Building such an L2 oversi= facility prematurel may well chap e the site T, ---- -_ y 9�ation In fact, in at least similar case to date, premature expansion of the regional sewer ystem"1Lithout a demonstrated regional need "resulted in a direct violation of y Development Framework managed growth principles Woodbur Whether the two l cities' recent commitments to control growth through strict local plans and ordinances will prevent this from recurring in practice remains to be seen. Plan amendments with strong implementation follow -up have not yet been enacted in either community, as noted in the response to comments 2 and 3. Basic growth management issues have yet to be resolved through local comprehensive plans and local sewer plans. - � &.,� eor4u ((l Comment: The Council's growth guidance system is capable of preventing premature metropolitan system expansion and capacity use. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) y1L Response: Although it is certainly tr cy that the Council has considerable G� a ility to control the expansion and use of the metropolitan sewer system, this _ comment_ overstates the Council's ability to implement its Development Framework pIan for growth guidance. In essence, the Council is not able to effectively control premature expansion of local systems unless there is strong local If the Council chooses to go with decide how much of the $4 million Staff suggests that the Council g e 4 recently discussed and first mad then decide the formula or an by the two cities. 11 the Lake Ann alternat' they choose to ask t e =_nerally follow the os decide if they want c approach to determine t /, '�;/ _/O PC � e, they will have to community to Day. - sharing guidelines do the cost - sharina ow much should be paid Comment: The gross capital cost of the Lake Ann alternative is considerably less than the Lake Virginia alternative and is the wise investment. The basic point here, is that Lake Ann is expensive to build now, but that Lake Virginia costs considerably more later. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) Response: Staff continues to believe that the present value analysis is "th Onx_Y w"«to approach this problem. It takes into account how much is spent and aT� what point in time. The basic point behind present value analysis is that dollars spent today are considerably more important and valuable than dollars 11 spent 15 and 20 years down the no4. (Chanhassen, Eden Pr irie) A UV Staff feels that the Council should continue to look at the two alternatives in pNpS terms of a present value analysis as opposed to looking at straight capital] S Neu costs unadjusted for when they will be spent. T� �°%r�' bee, irrp won«e a.p is ►� �- q j �"@ y Comment- The NQwlin report wants to make three points in the present value � analysis: First, they would like to look at 60 -year alternatives instead of 40- y ear alternatives; secondly, they questioned the use of salvage value in the dq analysis; and third, they look at the possibility that Chanhassen could only reduce 20 percent of the I and I. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) esponse: All three points are valid considerations but in the end the until must make its decision based on what is like happen and on their wn`'ud men a"o_the_H-sk —:i-nv staff proj ctions do not come through. da+�f- eatP ei 4s TJ�f- gam( Q bte d -be# AW 0F� fl The 40- ear f �mP hob Y ecause that is as far going as staff is comfortable in pro____ iec±;n9 Populati• It is recognized that the gravity lines L� Mr��5� do have a longer lifelkThis, in fact, is why salvage value has been introduced �'Vu into the argument. The salvage value does not represent what someone would pay for that facility at a given point in time, but rath is an estimate or way of sfi�v�ali ssing s to what is the value of the remaining -af the oroiec - 0L the -WcO it point, if Chanhassen cannot remove as much I/) as the Council projec- Sflcia A / tions would have them, this would force the building of facilities sooner and Qo*MMk change the present value analysis. If the I/I cannot be reduced sufficiently, he Council wilLhav�to decide if this — i-s -a- .regional offal problem i5>_(VCG 73fa !&Ou4 i719A7 �sTlr�ld —l�� A OY 708LIS V- L� Staff recommends with respect to present worth analysis that we continue to use 40 years, that we continue to use the salvage value concept, and that we continue to ask that Chanhassen reduce its I/I by 50 percent. �( yJ� w,ua�� CTS R?- ►9411u F71zMC,Y PL09MFD 1�U7 )n Comment: Neither alternative will brea t e an a SAC Fund could run a de icit in the future if the number of SAC collections declines, the SAC level is not increased to cover the projected deficit and other fund sources p are not developed. SAC increases, however, have been authorized at levels exceeding 10 percent per year for the next number of years. Neither alternative will independently produce a SAC fund deficit. All future sewer facility projects contributed equally to the potential for a SAC fund deficit. °Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) 51,�Cj � �'a 6a4,tO 7 , . 1, e� Response: Based on the study reported to Carl Ohrn in a July 31, 1985, memo- randum, the SAC Fund would have a $23.9 million deficit at the end of 1995 if the Lake Ann alternative were selected and the current SAC rate were collected �y during the intervening While a SAC rate increase was requested as a �s part of the 1986 budget review process, no documentation was presented and the increase will not be recommended for approval until the documentation can be �p1 reviewed and found to make case. �e 7 IV' Comment: The Shorewood bypass project is only one item in MWCC's large 1985- 1990 Development Program. The MWCC development program includes $177 million for interceptor and treatment work construction projects during 1986 through 1990. The Shorewood interceptor bypass project will be the last major inter- ceptor project in Sewer Service Area 4 during this period. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) Response: The Lake Ann /Lake Virginia interceptor is the nl major interceptor mac, project proposed in the MWCC's 1986 -1990 development pro ram. However, several I N other smaller interceptor repair and rehabilitation projects are proposed as 6 well as posse le expansion and upgrading of the ue a e herefore, substantial expenditure is still expected for Sewer Service Area 4. 7a*j _-TLE 7 Comment: Sewer Service Area 4 is a SAC fund creditor. Sewer Service Area 4 has paid in $1 million more to the SAC fund than it has received in "alloca- tions." Sewer Service Area 4 is paying its own way and for improvements in other service areas. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) Response: The SAC system is a region -wide program or regional pool. No debt Payments are charged, and no revenues are credited to any individual city or (i\ service area. Inasmuch as information is currentl _not vailable regarding the fund in sources of any capital improvements, it is not possible to calculate �_� the relationship the capiiaTZDsrtsor any specific city and the debt (fE� ayments made to the MWCC by any specific city have to each other. It would be �L 0,) ecessary to have an allocation of costs of each improvement to the benefitted � cit' In summary, it appears to come down to determining how much �eb' — service has, or will, be paid for the benefit of each city and how much of this debt service has each city paid? This information is not available under the present procedures��, f (1VL Div ------ -I'r1C L t6l- Y.�"E2 E Comment: Cost estimates do not reflect current conditions. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) Res onse: Both the MWCC and their consulting engineers have updated and dv�p refined their cost estimates to July 1985 conditions. The MWCC and consultant k engineers have used the latest and best estimates for current costs. These fLt�� costs can be used as a general guide at this stage in policy analysis. The costs appear to be reasonable. A final cost estimate will be developed by the �(S MWCC for eit er a tnerative for inclusion later in a development program and capital budget to be reviewed and approved by the Council. Comment: Operating costs for the Lake Virginia forcemain would be higher than the Lake Ann alternative. ( ity of Minnetonka) OLIO ot�":571 rom Response: The forcemain operating costs r ore_eXpensive than the gravity sewer. However, when both capital and operating costs are taken into account, the Lake Virginia alternative is cheaper. --The staff report estimates the "present value" f both capital and operating costs for each alternative and then — reads those costs over 40 years. The equivalent annual costs for the Lake Virginia alternative are $508,970 and for the Lake Ann alternative are $725,324, assuming no contribution from the local governments. Comment: The city strongly supports the Lake Ann /Red Rock gravity inter- ceptor. The city will pay 24 percent of the interceptor capital cost, up to $1,568,000, in the year that the pipe is finished and operational. The facility is to provide 2.3 MGD capacity for Eden Prairie use. The city will not be entitled to partial ownership because of payment. The city will cooperate on right -of -way acquisition for this project. (Eden Prairie) Response: These are the same conditions of payment, capacity, ownership and cooperation that have been proposed and discussed during the review of alternatives for this project. These conditions would be stipulated in an agreement between the city, the MWCC and the Council. Eden Prairie should �\ amend their CSP to include these conditions if the gravity alternative is approved by the Council. The local sewer plan will have to be submitted to and Cpprbved by the MWCC before the project could be started. Comment: The city's statement of Aug. 29, 1985, indicates that the city will pay 27.4 percent of capital costs for Lake Ann -Red Rock gravity sewer phase III, which could amount to $482,000 based on current cost estimates. The facility would reserve 3.3 MGD capacity for Chanhassen use at the time the area is included in the urban service area of an MWCC- approved CSP. The city agrees to pay interest on 27.4 percent of the Lake Ann interceptor capital costs until the city is permitted to use the new system. The entire outstanding balance on this agreement will be paid when local sewer service is made available for service use. The city would like to negotiate a principal and interest payment system which uses SAC surcharge for payment. All ownership rights would remain with the MWCC. The city would convey easement rights in the area between Hwy. — 5 and the Lake Ann phase I interceptor. (Chanhassen) Response: The Chanhassen statement gives the same conditions of payment, capac- ity, ownership and cooperation that have been proposed and discussed during the review of alternatives for this project. The beginning and ending point of Lake Ann phase III interceptor has not been defined to date. This must be agreed to before the gravit alternative is approved. Chanhassen does have an _ adequate on -si a ys em or finance provided their rural area minimum lot size is 10 acres. The city does not have a CSP approved by the MWCC.;,,,, . - The description of Lake Ann phase III interceptor has to be agreed to before the gravity alternative is approved. If the gravity sewer is the chosen alternative, the MWCC and Council should enter into an agreement with Chanhassen that addresses concerns of the Council related to ownership, control and use of the pipe and 1— ing. Chanhassen should have an MWCC- approved CSP before the MWCC proceed th hg project. 2"arr is uncom nrtable with the `idea of having the MWCC loan money to the city of Chanhassen until they decide to build the local system which would hook up to Lake Ann. This would, in effect, help to leverage the city's development efforts by allowing them to postpone some sewer expenditures and go on to undertake other expenditures. Also, it allows them to pass some of the risk of 0 whether development will actually occur back to the MWCC and the Council. It is preferred that they pay when the Lake Ann service is available to them. The city should also be aware that the SAC fund is a rei onal pool system, not a local system of accounting. PROVISION OF SEWER SERVICE ISSUES Comment: The Lake Ann /Red Rock gravity sewer alternative will provide permanent Tong-term sewer service for four service areas, namely: 1) Shorewood inter- ceptor bypass, 2) Lake Ann gravity, 3) Riley Creek interceptor, and 4) Red Rock interceptor. The Lake Virginia /Riley Creek alternative would solve only one of these needs immediately (Shorewood bypass), and sometime in the future would provide the Riley Creek interceptor but would not address the local needs of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. (Chanhassen and Eden Prairie) �}(fi Response: The attached figure No 1 illustrates the four permanent long -term sewer service areas at the cities state will be provided for by the Lake Ann/ Red Rock interceptor. They are as follows: 1) the bypass of the overloaded interceptor in p inChanhassen ,'� ) e n c 3)theRiley CreekandBluff Creek watershedhin Chanhassen, and 4) the Red Rock interceptor which would provide local service for Eden Prairie. The all - forcemain alternative and future Riley Creek interceptor would provide the following service: 1) the by -pass of the overloaded Lake Virginia pump sta- tion, 2) the upgrading of the Chanhassen pump station to year 2000/2020 service needs, and 3) the Riley Creek /Bluff Creek gravity sewer service for Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. The two cities state that no future Riley Creek interceptor will be needed or should be provided. Chanhassen would pump back all their flow of the Bluff Creek and south one -half of Riley Creek watersheds to the Red Rock inter- ceptor. This would require immediate oversizing of the Red Rock interceptor o for service needs 30 to 40 years in the future. This situation brings up o��°�" ? oncerns about Phasing of land development consistent with matrnnnli— +`>_ -� C If the Red Rock interceptor alternative is chosen, the Metropolitan Council does not propose to size that interceptor to meet some future needs, several decades in the future, in the Riley Creek and Bluff Creek watersheds. The sizing would be solely for the anticipated needs, as agreed to, in the Lake Ann „ l service area depicted in Figure 1. `� AT If the Lake Virginia to Purgatory interceptor orcemain is chosen, could plan to receive Chanhassen 7 _� gravity sewer service through the Riley Creek interceptor / E,for the south one-halt of tTie Riley Creek and all of Bluff Creek watersheds, a such time that the Chanhassen pump station reaches its design capacity for A'r r ,sanitary wastewater flow and the Council has incorporated this interceptor in fps.. 00 the sewer policy plan. Local sewer plans would have to be approved as well. Chanhassen need not provide extensive pump stations and forcemains to receive service from the Riley Creek interceptor under this proposal. All city service would be by gravity. Eden Prairie would r_e.cPiv he use of the Riley Lr-eek interceptor in their city for Tocal service. T} 05e TH-Aq T HSZE Tb I20ce-1V'E Aa_L7 t --'SE IV L�I�S '�:)Onj i3--- S7A FF p2 Cj�t�St77u�'6 777 10 Comment: The MWCC strongly advocates the elimination of lift stations and forcemains and maximizes the use of gravity sanitary sewers. The Red Rock interceptor would eliminate two pump stations and forcemains that would remain in service under the Lake Virginia to Purgatory Creek forcemain. (Eden Prairie, Chanhassen) liu4 4i� MY/r� 1Pin a e ! be,T -6 e onset The MWCC has no established olic as to whether a gravity sewer or in is�pr a metro po itan sewer service. 41- 11P,(4 M n,e Gu�rrcn camtour DuE l I X In the p st, when there were 90 percent ederal and state grants for construc- tion, the MWCC and Council did lean toward all gravity sewers, because grants G were paying for most of the construction and gravity sewers which are more �f�� stly to construct and less costly to operate and maintain. The grant paid W� .,for construction and the user paid for operation. Recently (July 1985), there �.r0 was very little cost difference between thQ Maple Plain Dump station and ALI-, forcemain alternative to Long Lake versus the gravity alternative through Orono TrY�jr�1 to Mound. These costs included operation and maintenance costs of the forcemain. The MWCC recommended the forcemain alternative for this project. VJhfV 7 I� [an MWCC should continue to review and recommend alternatives on a project -by- Lcicb o6 ject basis without restrictions or other constraints as to which process or fulf u- cedure should be used for sewerage systems. The difference in capital costs �iuc+Z operation costs provides a means to evaluate the alternatives. No changes this orocess are reouired. 0"r C0"fi1LC -r _ Z' i Comment: Compatibility with design of the Purgatory Creek interceptor. This sMMg v interceptor is the major conduit for Sewer Service Area No. 4 and is gradually increased in size from Minnetonka to the Minnesota River. Service for the Lake Ann gravity alternative is provided south of Hwy. 5 in the Purgatory inter- ceptor. Adding the flow of the Lake Virginia forcemain upstream of this location will cause future capacity problems in the Purgatory interceptor. (Eden Prairie, Chanhassen, Minnetonka) 10600 Response: The consulting engineer for this project examined this condition and concluded there is capacit for the Lake Virginia forcemain at the north city AWl emit -s of Eden rairie. n examination of the pipe capacity at that location and upstream to Hwy. 7 shows there is 40 MGD peak flow capacity in this sewer. The average daily flow for 40 MGD peak flow is 22.2 MGD. In the Lake Minne- tonka region the average daily flow, including infiltration (but not large inflow), is 100 gallons per person per day. The sewer line is able to service about 222,000 population equivalent. The latest Council oro.iection sewered population for the 23 cities and townships served for the year 2000 is 87,800 aO and total employment for the year is 50,000 employees. Sewage equivalent for j�tdu 50,000 employment is about 12,500, for a total population equivalent use of 100,300 people in the year 2000. Both population and employment vary both up and down after the year 2000, but the general result is'iio dramatic increase in service needed for the forseeable futurelt There is adequate service in the Purgatory interceptor from Hwy. 7 south to the Minnesota River to accommodate the Lake Virginia forcemain flow at any location along the interceptor for the service area growth for the forseeable future. Comment: The Lake Ann gravity alternative appears to be more reliable than the forcemain alternative. The MWCC should encourage gravity sewers over forcemain alternatives when feasible. (Minnetonka) • Rassace L&JEL bump Ge11 L.L. Msltic � [1=—A-k .O(eA L.c -1tV N S'M Foss) ALC!(1 Response: The forcemain alternative does ha e a number of safety backup fea- ur The pump system ha ,9backuo pumpc iA case of mechanical failure and a tandby electric generator on the site w�`ch will supply electric needs in case of electrical failure. The Lake Virgin ya pump station will retain the present )forcemain system as a redundant cyctpm that can be used in case of other emer- JJ gencies. Failures of forcemains do occur when they are damaged from r_ nn_ ct�_ tion, but gravity sewers also break and fail when they are damaged for one do reason or another. Forcemains cce table safe method of transporting Ij� sewag ecen y recommended a forcemain from Maple Plain to Long Lake even though an all- gravity sewer from Maple Plain to Mound could e b provided at about the same cost. The MWCC uses either gravity or forcemain where feasible and economical, The on what is the most acceptable for the project. In 1982 -83 the MWCC recommended a development rogram amend t construct f Q inLor�� orcemain from the i a e „� g men to blVll LU Lne Lltnar� —� D1 ct� - lae�l- raF7�am 4D R'--VL Z E i k} 4� �1 Comment: The provide greater city of Waconia states the Lake future capacity, require Ann gravity alternative will life, and be (Waconia) less more environmentally sound than maintenance, the have a long useful all- forcemain alternative. Response: The capacity of each system is the same for Waconia .s use. The use- ful life of both sewers is 40 years. The construction cost of the gravity sewer will be greater, but operating cost will be less. The analysis of these alternatives shows that the forcemain alternative is less costly on an annual basis. Environ tall II !! table corridors can be found for either alterna- tives and the MWCC would have to search for and evaluate the alignments for either alternative prior to making a final recommendation on the design of either the forcemain or gravity system. In any event-Much of the service for Waconia must be provided through a forcemain irrespective f the alternative chosen. S StlLL 1AJThtE 3�MIE- :SOI0 t Somir"/S omment: Timing /completion. The MWCC staff states both alternatives, ithout (i 1" reseen dela s, will likely take the same amount of time to construct. It is more likely the forcemain alternative will take longer to et approval of delays it will experience from people opposed to the project. (Eden Prairie, tV Chanhassen)�g PO �E �c0r7 1 fi2sr� bL,# no 1 hri eL {O suapee# S es onse: This is ha d to verify because the final alignment for the forcemai - s is not established It a be t at there is little or no opposition to an acceptable alianmen for the�f remain. If this is the case, the forcemain construction will reguir es�f s lima to Mild than th gravity ca i, e FQIdK' Since the alternative alignments for or �ain hav �40�'y �� U�OI/ and evaluated and an alternative has not been selected yet to b doftified construction time for either project can be determined. 41hiI DOA Comment: Variations in population growth and in removal of inflow and infiltra- tion could produce sewer capacity problems within the MUSA if the Lake Virginia forcemain alternative is chosen. The Chanhassen lift station and forcemain could experience capacity problems despite currently planned upgrading to 5 MGD capacity. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) 12 • ,zunua so Response: _Staff disagree Council Srow th forecasts, extremel reliable in the Past do not show this scenario as very likely. It is true, however, at inadequate local I/I prevention and removal programs could affect cities' available The Council and the MWCC have urged C anhassen, in particular, to implement an active inflow- infiltration program. To the extent that local governments effectively deal with inflow - infiltration problems, additional sewer capacity is made available within the city's sewers allocation for development. The converse is also true. If local governments choose not to deal with such problems, the primary effect is on the individual local government, not the regional system as a whole. The effect on a local government ignoring the problem is to use its allocated sewer capacity for inflow- infiltration instead of accommodating development. This is why the Council.urges and the MWCC requires in local sewers plans active inflow - .infiltration implementation programs, including an identification of the problems and their causes, remedies proposed and the implementation scheme. In the unlikely event that the combination of higher than forecast growth rates and poor performance in controlling local inflow - infiltration occurs, the magni- tude o e problem is much more managea a an raises fewer issues than the current decision. Both the timing of such an event some years hence and the location of the facility within the MUSA make it quite a different situation. tl_��K Comment: The city of Chanhassen has excessive I/I into their system. Council L�s staff recommends a 50 percent reduction should be feasible for Chanhassen to COSH _ obtain with an active I/I removal program. The city disagrees with that e objective; only 0 to 20 percent removal can be expected. (Chanhassen) Response: The I/I study report done by the city and also daily flow records for the Chanhassen pump station show that Chanhassen has an unusually high peak flow rate. Normally, a sewage collection system with an average daily flow of 1 million ga s per day will have a Peak flow of three times the average flow or 3 MGD. The peak flow at the Chanhassen pump s a ion a tree incidences in the winter and early spring of 1985 where the peak flow was nine times as great as the average daily flow. The Chanhassen I/I study stated this condition has happened before. There is only one other city in the region with such an unsually high peak flow. All other cities are well in line with the MWCC design peak flow factor. (There are about 10 cities that have peak flows about 10 percent above normal.) In the Chanhassen case, the sewer system must be built three times as large as what would be done for any of the other 100 cities of the region. Secondly, the I/I problems in the Chanhassen system are not infiltration of groundwater, which is the normal case for most problem areas. Chanhassen problems are inflow problems because they occur only during or immediately after a heavy rainfall or snowmelt. The problems of the Chanhassen sewer system can be eliminated because these problems involved 5urface water connections in e sewer system, no eaky pipes in the street. Sewer service is cos ing Chanhassen sewer users more than other cities because of these problems and — will continue until these excessive flows are removed. While Chanhassen has addressed I/I in new construction, there remains the problems within the older parts of the city. The city needs to take a more aggressive look at I/I to determine the cost effectiveness of removing it from the local and metropolitan sewer system. The removal of excessive inflow from the Chanhassen sewer system will postpone the need to enlarge this facility for man years. 13 Currently, the July 1985 average daily flow at the Blue Lake WWTP is 19 MGD. The plant is designed to treat 20 MGD. However, during wet weather flow in March 1985, the plant had an average daily flow of over 22 MDG. This high flow caused the wastes to wash over the top of the plant gate and be discharged into the river. The effluent quality is poor when the plant flow is high. In time, the MPCA will require a plant expansion if inflow is not reduced by local governments. There is little analysis needed to verify that inflow removal is cost effective for Chanhassen. Some cities have undertaken programs for inflow removal because it is the prudent thing to do to cave extensive cost analysis study costs without an Comment: The MWCC states that relief for the Lake Virginia pump station should Fe provided at an early date. The MWCC states that 50 percent I/I removal is too optimistic for Chanhassen. Only about 20 percent I/I removal will be areaiofetheTregiionChaslnovstimulusbonlurbangdevelopmentrextending farther a into the rural area around these interceptors. (MWCC) Response: Relief will be provided to the Lake Virginia pump station by either alternative proposed. The MWCC is confused as to what the peak flow problem is in Chanhassen. The city has a severe inflow problem, and with proper manage- ment of the sewer system use, substantia inflow volume can be successfully removed with city rules and regulations and incentive /penalty programs. Only with the careful and very intensive process of land use planning and careful provision and timing of services can urban development be contained inside the 1ilJSA.� 690u"- IS 63rD? ,AWL &AC, c&026eM !-Yu rz7- �VNq X 777 Comment: Six developers and landholders in the Chanhassen gravity sewer watershed have stated they support the installation of the Lake Ann gravity alternative because they believe this alternative will provide more reliable sewer service to their landholdings. Response: All of the landholders in the Chanhassen watershed area will be subject to the same land use planning process and service availability for either interceptor alternative. Service availability for various land parcel will depend more on the MUSA of Chanhassen than whether there is an adequate sewer the region. abThese Tlandowners inpChanhassenoshouldd work rwith the cityMUSA of government to program this land for development as current open area inside MUSA is developed. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Comment: Sewer route nrnlif + forcemain alternative would provide foreaLforcemainnin 1986uandtargravity sewer in the Riley Creek watershed after 2020, totaling 20.4 miles of metropolitan interceptors. The Lake Ann gravity interceptor alternative would require only 8.3 miles of sewer construction. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) Response: The gravity alternative with about 2.5 miles of 30 -inch diameter forcemain at its upper end, has a total length of about 10 miles. The force- main alternative, for its full length to Purgatory Creek, is about 6 -3/4 miles long. After year 2020 the Riley Creek interceptor is needed. This is a 7 -mile interceptor. It is understood that the Lake Ann alternative would eliminate the need for some local trunk lines. However, it should also be realized that not every parcel of land is an environmentally sensitive area BUT. 2 14 I ' Comment: A lift station /forcemain system is less flexible and more prone to damaging breaks and spills than gravity sanitary sewers. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) 1Ve60ot! cuffv 49U'VZ OP!_-ltj -_D ONE COULD S&Y 7 hh s III Res onse. A forcemain sewer, built and operated within its design parameters, 0 �_ Ti no more 'ble to fai n a ZLwer. This project has the © f flowing unique conditions that will provide substantial protection for the rea where the new forcemain is located: 1. The present pumping system and existing forcemains will be used as a backs ,4(50 system in case of failure of the new system. Therefore, the Lake Virginia Backur pump s ation and forcemain will have redundancy built into the system for protection. +i%1Z6 dc&'S,TO Mir A)717AU „�T a Pt�i� -n+ p- C� 1 r$ yc of Z7�c Ui� �j I 2. The Lake Virginia pump station will have standby pumps an� standby electric generators in case of emergencies. �r L.6-ST- -n-F TU.- gAS)l,tt. 3. An alignment away from new and dense development. out of the Christmas Lake and Lotus Lake watersheds., and protection to Lake Minnetonka can provide al, he safety needed for the area. �7 •7 7 U.1Ity {fit -pT- SLZ/Z,�T 7 r:TLI; DttJ T!�'IS CDtiIE N�76t}&�S NorIir b 8��'e 4. Present forcemain cost estimate includes an early warning system should a break occur.?/ LvAdeauatetsafeguards and system redundancy for the forcemain alternative are provided. 1W 7- f'f)2 C7 Comment: The construction of the Red Rock interceptor avoids running a metro- politan interceptor in the wetlands of the Minnesota River bottoms. (Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) `� _ Response: This is true /�Ov ided that Chanhassen "pumps back" a large part about 12 square miles of area) of the Riley Creek and Bluff Creek watersheds. This would be the service plan under the Lake Ann gravity alternative. This would eliminate the need for the Riley Creek interceptor, but will require Chanhassen to build an elaborat pump station and forcemain system to serve the entire southern one -ha f of the c' snuck leoa Z Pez'x� T1•4� Lake UtrW'WA- If the Lake Virginia alternative is selected, Chanhassen may plan for a future all- gravity sewer system to serve the southern one -half of the city. The south one -half of Chanhassen would be provided service through a gravity sewer in the Riley Creek watershed. Such a facility would be well above the wetlands of the Minnesota River bottomlands. See Figure 1 at the eginning o i report.) hbtu'" S 71'/'+'7` /.3L -7 :_7P1 7? Comment: Forcemain alternative is located along a sensitive route. J Chanhassen, Eden Prairie) Response: The forcemain alignment as presently proposed was selected in 1982 before much development in the vicinity of the forcemain alignment was con- structed. The final alignment has not been selected. Before MWCC selects an alignment, aiTTeasible alterna ive routes will be evaluated. =LrL I3tN A final alignment of a forcemain alternative should be selected to minimize disruption to sensitive locations. A detailed cParch for alternate routes has yet to be done. - 7vo 9 r7 M .t` ZE COS T� 7 20U1 E4Sb1ltiA3 7 Sul 4g77 ' 4126UNE-U3� ITM PPfr_ S O N (1 m muA rry "? 15 Wor l"' �. Vg�q tS Comment: An environmental impact statement IS) must be prepay( ;tZr to decision on the proposed amendment. A more detailed environmental analysis should be made. (Christmas Lake Homeowners Association) Response: While the Council is concerned a e vironmental impacts of the alternatives, the Council is addressin a olicy iss a of a design issue. Thus, there is no require IS. All the es or a orcemain rom the ake Virginia pump station to the Purgatory Creek interceptor have not been identified and studied.This will be done prior to selecting the final alignment. The MWCC will be directed to identify and evaluate all feasible alignments for the all - forcemain proposal to relieve the Lake Virginia pump station. Similar direction would be given should the gravity system be chosen The environ- \ mentally sensitive areas of Christmas and Lotus Lakes and Near Mountain developmen must be considered when the alternatives are evaluated. f3IZaihf��25 51.x. Comment: The ake Ann interceptor alignment is more environmen lly acceptable than the Lake Virginia forcemain interceptor. (Christmas Lake Association) �O/Z Di5cLt75� Res onse: All ali nments for forcemain have yet to be studie The MWCC will be directe to consider other alignments for the orcemain and evaluate TffE significant concerns prior to selecting the final alignment. R/f3U 4, Comment: The average daily sewage flow to the.Blue Lake WWTP is near 19 MGD $ O flow rate. The DNR is concerned that water quality standards could potentially �� be violated. The DNR recommends that studies be done to determine if a plant expansion will be needed by the year 2000. (DNR Response: The MWCC is proposing a study for the expansion of the Blue Lake WWTP in their current 1986 -1989 Development Program. The plant is near capacity and will be considered a candidate for expansion. Plant expansion is in the Council's Water Resources Management Development Guide chapter. The Council and MWCC are in the process of reviewing the needs for the future of the Blue Lake WWTP. Comment: Two homeowners at Christmas Lake and Lotus Lake are concerned about what damage would be done to these two lakes if the forcemain alternative had a pipe failure and sewage spill into these lakes. Response: The proposal is significant and the MWCC should examine all feasible routings prior to selecting a final alignment. IMPACT ON EXISTING DEVELOPMENT Comment: The Near Mountain housing development is now being built with many homes of substantial value already occupied. The chief concern is that the forcemain alternative would run through this multimillion dollar development and cause substantial problems. (Lundgren Brothers Construction Co.) Response: This is an- moact that needs to be considered. Alternative align- ments will be studied by the MWCC before making the selection of a final alignment for the Lake Virginia forcemain if the Council selects this sewer service alternative. A review of alignments should provide information as to the concerns of the alternatives studied. /LL U07-E FE5Z- 77-t15 +L7 JL3028- PHENV2 �� 7t) �P4R6 &L4MUA�7 7 lG 7 (11i {1 I.�Cyi{6i1 (�Q� Hoisington Group Inc. PRE Land Use Consultants Land & Natural Resource Analysis • Planning Project Management CHANHASSEN POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS REGIONAL SETTING — Chanhassen is a 3rd tier suburb which adjoins both Eden Prairie and Minnetonka on the East and Chaska on the Southwest. The City is well served by State Trunk Highways 5, 41 and 101, the former of which has been recently improved. It also has a very large land area available for development and offers a unique high emenity residential lifestyle while offering very good access to the major employment centers in Eden Prairie and Chaska. The City provides major employment opportunities of its own in the rapidly growing Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Employment within Chanhassen has grown by over 1,500 jobs since 1980. Eden Prairie is one of the fastest growing cities in the Twin City Metropolitan area. It has nearly tripled in population from 9,109 to 24,052 since 1975. Employment has also grown very rapidly in Eden Prairie where the ratio of jobs to population is currently 1:1. Eden Prairie is no longer just a bedroom community because it employs as many people as it houses. It is evolving as a Hi —tech _ community and is the headquarters for seven of Minnesotas largest corporations. Because Minnetonka is nearly full, Eden Prairie is receiving the brunt of the southwestern suburban development. As Eden Prairie continues to fill up and /or as prime Eden Prairie land becomes less easily assembled, development will naturally spill over into Chanhassen making it the logical recipient of future southwest suburban growth. Because Eden Prairie still has land available for development, signigicant growth in Chanhassen will likely occur in the later half of the 1990's. Because of its environmental setting and its location at the heart of one of the fastest growing residential and employment centers in the Metropolitan area, Chanhassen will experience accelerated growth between 1985 and 2000. HTSTORY Chanhassen's population increased by 30% during the 1970's (Table 1). During this same period household size decreased by 15; resulting in a 57% growth in the number of housing units within the City. The City's housing stock increased by 829 total units or an average of 83 units per year from 1970 to 1980. 10334 Balsam Lane Eoen Prairie. MN 55344 (612) 941 -8044 / 941 -6258 TABLE 1 HISTORY APRIL AUGUST * Estimated Since 1984 Chanhassen has experienced an unprecedented increase in building permit activity (Table 2). Residential building permits totaled 166 in 1984. The total number of permits issued in 1985 through July 1, was 152. Based on the continuation of favorable interest rates and market conditions, it is projected that 250 residential building permits will be issued in 1985. TABLE 2 1970 1980 1985* 1985-= Total Units 1454 2283 2689 2745 Occupied Units 1349 2073 2564 2617 Vacancy Rate - - 4.65% 4.65% Household Size 3.59 3.04 2.86 2.86 Population 4879 6359 7370 7485 Employment 985 1201 - 2768 * Estimated Since 1984 Chanhassen has experienced an unprecedented increase in building permit activity (Table 2). Residential building permits totaled 166 in 1984. The total number of permits issued in 1985 through July 1, was 152. Based on the continuation of favorable interest rates and market conditions, it is projected that 250 residential building permits will be issued in 1985. TABLE 2 * Permit activity as of July 1, 1985 The City has already approved subdivisions which would result in the construction of an additional 2199 residential units within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Subdivisions involving another 163 units are currently under review (Table 3). Of this total, 374 are on lots served by municipal sanitary sewer which exists or is under construction (Table 4). Given the continuation of favorable interest rates through at least 1986, and the anticipated improvement in market conditions, new housing construction will exceed 250 units in 1986. Something nearing that number can be expected for 1987 as the threat of increasing rates draws home buyers into the housing market. CITY OF CHANHASSEN RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED YEAR SINGLE - FAMILY DUPLEX TOWNHOMES TOTAL DWELLING DETACHED UNITS 1980 41 9 10 99 1981 22 1 0 24 1982 19 1 0 21 1983 60 4 9 104 1984 108 17 6 166 1985 106 15 4 152 * Permit activity as of July 1, 1985 The City has already approved subdivisions which would result in the construction of an additional 2199 residential units within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Subdivisions involving another 163 units are currently under review (Table 3). Of this total, 374 are on lots served by municipal sanitary sewer which exists or is under construction (Table 4). Given the continuation of favorable interest rates through at least 1986, and the anticipated improvement in market conditions, new housing construction will exceed 250 units in 1986. Something nearing that number can be expected for 1987 as the threat of increasing rates draws home buyers into the housing market. TABLE 3 LOTS AND UNITS APPROVED AND PENDING BUT UNDEVELOPED Subdivision Housing Units /Type ^ Piper Ridge 12 single family Maple Ridge 13 single family _ Red Cedar Cove 18 townhomes Hidden Valley 109 single family South Lotus Lake 23 single family 6 duplex 28 condominiums Fox Hollow 66 single family _ Fox Chase 52 single family Near Mountain 149 single family 114 condominiums Pheasant Hill 76 single family Pleasant Hill 4 single family Waldrip /Orchard ^ Hills 9 single family Lake Susan West 278 single family 109 townhomes 172 duplex 216 quads 128 apartments — 120 eightplex Lake Susan South 283 single family 8 duplex 92 townhomes 92 apartments Chaparral 4th 65 single family Hilloway Corp. 23 single family Western Hills 3rd 57 single family 18 townhomes Carver Beach Estates 22 single family TOTAL 2,362 units TABLE 4 STATUS OF SEWER INSTALLATION IN APPROVED SUBDIVISIONS WITHIN KISA Approved Subdivisions Approved Subdivisions With Approved and Pening Subdivis With Sewer Installed Sewer - Under Construction Without Sewer )m Name # of Iots/ Name # of Lots/ Name # of Iots/ Units Units Units Near Mountain 52 Maple Ridge 13 Piper Ridge 12 (Chestnut Ridge Additions 1 -4) Fox Hollow 66 Hidden Valley 54 Hidden Valley 55 (Phase 1) (Phase 2) Pheasant Hill 27 Near Mountain 97 Pheasant Hill 49 (Chestnut Ridge (Phase 2 & 3) 5 & 6 - Trapper Pass Additions) Fox Chase 52 Red Cedar Cove 18 Waldrip's/ Orchard Hills 9 South Lotus Lake 57 Pleasant Hill 4 Lake Susan South 475 Lake Susan West 1,023 Carver Beach Estates 22 Near Mountain (Condominium Phase) 114 Chaparral 4th 65 Hillcway 23 Western Hills 3rd 75 TOTAL 21 0 164 1,988 The City of Chanhassen has experienced a high rate of growth in employment since 1980. A total of 1,567 new jobs have been added to the 1,201 existing in 1980. The City also has land use proposals which will add in excess of 400 new jobs from Electro Craft (266), Lane Envelope (20) and Victory Envelope (125). While the rate of growth in new jobs is expected to decrease between 1985 and 2000, it is anticipated that the ratio of employment to population will continue to increase in a fashion that parallels Eden Prairie. — TABLE 5 GROWTH IN EMPLOYMENT 1980 to July 1985 Company Number of Employees Year of Occupancy Empac 90 1980 Victory Envelope 50 1981 — Energy Controls, Inc. 21 1980 Murphy Machine 8 1981 Kiowa 32 1984 United Mailing, Inc. 352 1983 Dayco Concrete 46 1982 CPT 500 1982 The Press, Inc. (60 additional employees prior to 1980) 275 1979 Lyman Lumber 45 1980 Automated Building Components 45 1980 Prairie House Restaurant 35 1984 McDonalds Restaurant 33 1983 Redmond Products 35 1985 Total New Jobs 1,567 CHANHASSEN WILL CONTINUE TO EXPERIENCE SIGNIFICANT GROWTH The Metropolitan Council staff predicts a very erratic and perhaps even counter cyclical growth pattern for Chanhassen. It has based its projections on the following assumptions: 1. Chanhassen will continue to experience a predominance of single— family development. This will foster slow growth, 2. Housing cost is relatively high and appeals almost exclusively to the 2nd and 3rd time home buyer market. 3. Eden Prairie is competing with Chanhassen for development and will capture the bulk of new housing in the southwest suburbs over the next 20 years. 4. Acess, or the lack thereof, is not a factor which will impede growth in Chanhassen. However, Chanhassen is ten minutes further from the core Cities which favors 2nd tier suburban development. 5. Jobs and housing are relatively independent and a growth in employment in Chanhassen does not necessarily mean a growth in housing /population (i.e. relatively few people who live in Chanhassen will work in Chanhassen). 6. Rapid population growth in Eden Prairie is attributable to the post —war baby boom which is now past. Chanhassen will not enjoy growth which results from significant natural increase. 7. The aggregate demand for housing in the second half of the decade will be half what it was from 1980 through 1984 throughout the Metro area unless in— migration proves to be much greater than has been so far assumed. Aggregate housing demand will continue relatively low throughout the 1990's. 8. Employment which leads housing has already peaked in the region. This portends less job creation and therefore less new housing demand throughout the Metro area. 9. Interest rates will not further decline and will likely increase. 10. A recession will occur sometime during the second half of this decade. The conclusions drawn by the Metropolitan Council Staff are that Eden Prairie will continue to grow very rapidly while Chanhassen will nearly stop growing after 1990. While we agree with many of the Staff's assumptions, there are many that we disagree with. First of all, we do not think Chanhassen will continue to develop predominantly as a single — family community. Of the 2,362 lots and units already approved and pending approval (Table 3), single— family housing comprises just 52% while townhouses, quads, apartments and condos account for over 40% of all proposed new housing. What this means is that the City will offer a much broader range of housing types that will appeal to approximately the same home buyers that have stimulated Eden Prairie's growth for the past 10 years. Furthermore, and again based on approved projects, the range of costs for new housing will also be broadened. New housing products will see an increase in the ratio of rental and modest priced owner occupied housing which appeal to the first -time home buyer. To what degree Eden Prairie is competing with Chanhassen for housing is unknown. Certainly, Eden Prairie is going to get far more development than is Chanhassen; nobody disputes that. The question is whether or not people who work in Eden Prairie, Chaska and Chanhassen or, for that matter, in other parts of the Metro area, and who desire a southwest orientation will nearly all choose to live in Eden Prairie. We think not. We believe Chanhassen offers a unique small town atmosphere that is distinctive and highly attractive to residents and that many will prefer Chanhassen to Eden Prairie. We also think Chanhassen will grow as a result of Eden Prairie's development magnetism. We agree whole heartedly that access will not impede the development of Chanhassen. The .City is very close to I -494 and requires no bridges (such as Burnsville, Eagan and Apple Valley did) to access the regional hub. Furthermore, Chanhassen has several very good arterial and collector streets either existing or programed for improvement which provide direct access to the Interstate System. For example, State Trunk Highway 5 will be widened to four lanes by 1990 -91, Townline Road will be extended from County Road 4 to 101 by 1990 and right -of -way acquisition plus two lanes of construction is being programed for Highway 212 by 1990 -92. In addition, the Crosstown Highway 62 will be extended from Shady Oak Road to I -494 by 1987. Because of these improvements, growth in Chanhassen will be supported by favorable access. We agree that employment and housing are, in many cases, relatively independent. Eden Prairie is a good example where approximately 20% of the resident population also works in the City. While Chanhassen is not Eden Prairie, it is located at the very heart of one of the fastest growing employment centers in the Metropolitan area. As such it offers a quality residential environment within easy driving access to job opportunities in both Eden Prairie and Chaska. Employment being essential to population growth, there is likely to be no area in the region more likely to grown than Eden Prairie /Chanhassen. We agree that the baby boom contributed heavily to the growth of Eden Prairie and West Bloomington and that the aggregate housing demand metro -wide will decline due to the declining size of the population reaching the home buying cohort. On the other hand, we think the recent development interest in Chanhassen portends a 56,000 52,000 48,000 44,000 40,000 36,000 Z O 32,000 Q 28,000 a O 24,000 a 20,000 16,000 12,000 8,000 4,000 0 1970 EDEN PRAIRIE POPULATION ESTIMATES 75 80 85 90 95 2000 YEAR lfflp / / X60 1° -� Q • �0. / �• 75 80 85 90 95 2000 YEAR 56,000 52,000 48,000 44,000 40,000 F- 36,000 Z LU 32,000 O 28,000 J EL :2 24,000 w 20,000 16,000 12,000 8,000 4,000 0 1970 EDEN PRAIRIE EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES 75 80 85 90 95 2000 YEAR / / lo�6j 75 80 85 90 95 2000 YEAR continuation of rapid sustainable growth in the southwest suburbs and the attraction of an inordinate share of the unaccounted for regional growth attributable to in- migration. According to the Metropolitan Council Staff, the number of people moving into the Metropolitan Area from 1980 through 1984 may have approached 30,000. The strength of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen as the complete residential community /employment center will be a major factor in drawing residents to this part of the Metro area. Of course, no one can predict whether or when interest rates will rise or fall. The probability is that they will trent upward rather than downward but so long as the rate of inflation remains low, interest rates will not change dramatically at least until mid to late 1986. This means that housing starts will continue at a relatively high level at least in some parts of he metropolitan area through 1986 and well into 1987. The power of Eden Prairie to draw development will result in significant growth in Chanhassen in the shortrun. Long term, Chanhassen will receive a considerable amount of Eden Prairie's spillover growth. We agree that a recession is fairly likely during the latter half of this decade. It would be surprising if one did not occur. We do not believe it will be of the magnitude of the 1981 -82 recession and, like Eden Prairie, we believe growth will be able to be sustained at a relatively high level in Chanhassen even during future periods of recession. SUMMARY Chanhassen has reached a point in its development history not unlike the Eden Prairie of 1977. Eden Prairie was expected to grow rapidly during the early 1970's but due to economic conditions and burgeoning growth south of the Minnesota River, the boom did not begin until much later. Chanhassen is remarkably similar to Eden Prairie in terms of environmental quality and location. It offers a slightly less urban atmosphere with the promise of ever improving access to all sectors of the metro area. It is also beginning to appeal to a much broader market than in the past. We can only conclude that Chanhassen will continue to grow at a much higher rate than is projected by the Metropolitan Council Staff and that an appropriate level of infrastructure must be provided to account for a higher than expected growth scenario. ASSUMPTIONS 1. Household size in Chanhassen will continue to decrease in accord with local and regional trends: 1980 3.04 1990 2.83 2000 2.75 2. The City will continue to experience a five percent (5%) vacancy rate. 3. A recession of the magnitude of 1981 and 1982 will not occur during the period 1985 to 1990. It is assumed that national economic conditions will cause a slowdown in housing starts sometime during 1987. 4, interest rates will decline only slightly or not at all in 1985 and will remain relatively low well into 1986. If rates begin to increase in 1986, housing starts will .continue high well into 1987 as a response to the threat of increasing interest rates. CONCLUSIONS 1. Subdivisions containing 374 undeveloped lots are already under construction and will be occupied by 1990, 2. Based on lot availability, favorable market conditions, modest interest rates and current building permit activity, building permits will exceed 250 in each of 1985 and 1986 and will average at least 200 units per year from 1985 to 1990. 3. The rate of increase in household formation from 1990 to 2000 will actually exceed the 1970's rate (estimated at 50 to 807) primarily due to spillover from Eden Prairie. 4. Growth in Chanhassen will not be impeded by increasingly difficult access especially in the quadrant lying northerly of Highway 5 where alternatives to Highway 5 are available. 5. Due to environmental quality continue to improve, over ti as Eden Prairie continues to likely not approach the very Chanhassen will receive Eden spillover growth. and location, the market will me, for housing in Chanhassen fill up. While growth will high Eden Prairie rates, Prairie's and Minnetonka's 6. The ratio of employees to population will continue to increase over time contributing to population growth and increased demands on sanitary sewer capacity. 7. The population projections contained herein are very close to those that are contained in the City's Guide Plan (11,000 in 1990 and 15,500 in 2000) and the City has relied on these in approving development proposals. If adjusted dramatically downward as suggested by the Metropolitan Council Staff, the City's growth could be affected as early as 1988 and developers who have come to rely on approvals already granted would not be allowed to proceed to develop lands in the City of Chanhassen. PROJECTIONS TABLE 6 POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT 596 PROJECTIONS - 1985 Chanhassen 1990 2000 Total Units 3739 5702 -7128 Households 3552 5417 -6772 Vacancy Rate 5% 5% Household Size 2.83 2.75 Population 10,052 14;897- 18,622 Employment 3500 5000 -7500 Metro Council Population 8500 9500 Households 3000 3500 Employment 3000 4000 TABLE 7 URBAN LAND DEMAND /SUPPLY Chanhassen Metro Council Demand 1980 -1990 1015 596 Demand with Overage 1980 to 1990 1522 894 Supply to 1990 2463 2463 Demand 1990 -2000 1010 235 Total Demand 1980 -2000 2025 831 Demand with Overage 1980 -2000 2530 949 26,00P 24,00( 22,00( 20,00( 18,00( Z 16,OOC O Q 14,000 J Oa 12,000 a 10,000 8,OD0 4,000 2,000 0 1910 CHANHASSEN POPULATION ESTIMATES 75 80 85 90 95 ?nnn 25,450 18,600 15,500 14,900 i, 500 H Z W r O J a w 26,000 24,00C 22,OOC 20,OOC 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 EM 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1970 CHANHASSEN EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES 75 80 85 90 YFGR 7,400 ,000 ,000 05 'noo E s� i•' •— _ ' METRO 1985 4 PHI 75 80 85 90 YFGR 7,400 ,000 ,000 05 'noo 6. The ratio of employees to population will continue to increase over time contributing to population growth and increased demands on sanitary sewer capacity. 7. The population projections contained herein are very close to those that are contained in the City's Guide Plan (11,000 in 1990 and 15,500 in 2000) and the City has relied on these in approving development proposals. If adjusted dramatically downward as suggested by the Metropolitan Council Staff, the City's growth could be affected as early as 1988 and developers who have come to rely on approvals already granted would not be allowed to proceed to develop lands in the City of Chanhassen. PROJECTIONS TABLE 6 POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS - 1985 Chanhassen Total Units Households Vacancy Rate Household Size Population Employment Metro Council Population Households Employment 1990 2000 3739 5702 -7128 3552 5417 -6772 5% 5% 2.83 2.75 10,052 14,897- 18,622 3500 5000 -7500 8500 9500 3000 3500 3000 4000 TABLE 7 URBAN LAND DEMAND /SUPPLY Chanhassen Metro Council Demand 1980 -1990 1015 Demand with Overage 596 1980 to 1990 1522 894 Supply to 1990 2463 2463 Demand 1990 -2000 1010 235 Total Demand 1980 -2000 2025 831 Demand with Overage 1980 -2000 2530 949 P. Mack, Minneapolis; Dorothy Skarnulis, Marine on the St Croix; .Alfred Morin, Minneapolis; Gerald H. Biese, Eden Prairie: Betty Goodman, Burnsville; Galen T. Pate, Mendota Heights: and Diane S. McNearney, Rosemount Metropolitan Health Planning Board: Beverly Marie Scalze. Little Canada Waste Management Advisory Committee: Barry L. Tilley, Eagan. Minority Issues Advisory Committee: Martha Havican, St Paul. PUBLIC HEARINGS, PUBLIC MEETINGS Except where otherwise noted, the following hearings and meetings held by the Metropolitan Council will be in the Council offices. To obtain a document with information on the subject of each hearing or meeting, or confirmation of the date and time, call 291 -6464. The schedule is as follows: Oct. 10: Part 3 of the Water Resources Management Guide, a proposed water availability and use plan for the region. Public hearing is at 7 p.m. Oct 15: Draft Report of the Aggregate Resources Advisory Committee, assessing the need for protection of aggregate resources in the Twin Cities Area. The public meeting is at 7 p.m. Oct 25: Priorities for federal Title III funding for older people and changes in Council's work plan for its 1986 aging program. The hearing is at 9 a.m. Oct 28: Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's proposed 1986 -1990 development program including sewer and treatment plant improvements. The hearing will be at 4 p.m. Nov. 4: Revised and amended guidelines for highway right -of -way acquisition loan fund. Guidelines include loans to purchase "hardship" properties, homes that have to be sold but can't because they are in a highway right -of- way. Hearing is at 4 p.m. COUNCIL BEGINS REVIEW OF MEGA -MALL The Metropolitan Council began on Sept 27 a 90 -day "metropolitan significance" review of Bloomington's proposed Mall of America and Fantasyworld. (See "Council Actions. ") The development calls for a retail, entertainment, recreation, hotel, office and convention center complex of 11 million square feet to be build on the 85 -acre site previously occupied by Metropolitan Stadium. The proposed project is located in the northeast quadrant of the Killebrew Dr. and Hwy. 77 (Cedar Av.) interchange, south of Interstate Hwy. 494. For more information, call Council planner Pat. Pahl at 291 -6407. COUNCIL PRELIMINARY REVIEW FINDS BLOOMINGTON MEGA -MALL FORECASTS HIGH The proposed Bloomington mega -mall would generate about 15,000 new jobs for the state, according to an initial Metropolitan Council analysis of information provided by the developer, Triple Five Corp. of Edmonton, Alberta (See related item in "Council Actions. ") That figure is considerably lower than the 40,000 new jobs projected by Triple Five. It said nearly 60 percent of visitors to the mega -mall would be local residents who live within 50 miles of the mall. About four million tourists -- people coming from 100 or more miles away, or staying overnight - -could be expected to visit the mall yearly. Triple Five's original proposal said 11 million tourists would visit the site annually. This was later defined as turnstile counts. Highway improvements to accommodate traffic to the mall have been estimated to cost from $50 million to $215 REVIEW SCHEDULE OF METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT GUIDE AMENDMENTS REVISED The Metropolitan Council revised the schedule for reviewing amendments to the Metropolitan Development Guide regarding the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework (MDIF). The MDIF is a plan for managing regional resources to achieve orderly and economic development If you have questions about the amendments or the tentative schedule listed below, call Council planner Bob Davis at 291 -6317. The revised schedule is as follows: Week of Oct 7 Briefing of metropolitan commissions. Week of Oct. 21 Meetings_with business communit . Oct 21 -Nov. 5 Manners' FororlT —d er community outreach. Week of Nov. 18 "2' S-pubhir n. Dec. 12 Metropolitan and Community Development Committee review. Jan. 9 Council approves draft, sets hearing dates. Week of Feb. 10 Public hearings. Feb. 28 Hearing record closes. Mar. 20 Metropolitan and Community Development Committee adoption. April 10 Council adoption. REVIEW SCHEDULE OF SOLID WASTE PLAN REVISED The Metropolitan Council revised the schedule for reviewing amendments to the Metropolitan Development Guide on solid waste management. The plan sets criteria for issuing certificates of need for opening new landfills or expanding existing landfills. If you have questions about the amendments, or the tentative schedule listed below, call Council planner Carl Michaud at 291 -6579. The revised schedule is as follows: Oct 10 Metropolitan Council approves draft amendments and sets public hearing date. Nov. 20 Public hearing. Dec. 4 Hearing record closes. Jan. 7 Metropolitan Waste Management Advisory Committee review. Jan. 15 Environmental Resources Committee review. Jan. 23 Council adopts final amendments. COUNCIL SEEKS APPLICANTS FOR MINORITY ISSUES ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Metropolitan Council is accepting applications from people interested in serving on its 25- member Minority Issues Advisory Committee. Three at -large positions are open. The Council encourages applications from members of Asian, Black and Indian communities. The deadline for applications is Oct 11. Call Sandi Lindstrom of the Council staff at 291 -6390 for more information or an application form. COMING MEETINGS (Oct. 7 -17) (Meetings are tentative. To verify, call 291 - 6464.) Metropolitan Systems Committee, Monday, Oct 7, 4 p.m., Conference Room E. Air Quality Committee, Tuesday, Oct 8, 10 a.m., Conference Room B. Developmental Disabilities Advisory Committee, Tuesday, Oct. 8, 1 p.m., Conference Rooms C and D. Metropolitan Waste Management Advisory Comm ittee,Tuesday, Oct 8, 2 p.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Housing and Redevelopment Authority Advisory Committee, Wednesday, Oct 9, 9 am., HRA Planning Board, Wednesday, Oct 9, 4 p.m.. Council Chambers. Metropolitan River Corridors Study Committee, Thursd Oct 10, 12:30 p.m., Conference Room E. Metropolitan and Community Development Committee, Thursday, Oct 10, 1:30 p.m. Council Chambers. Metropolitan Council, Thursday, Oct 10, 4 p.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission, Mon Oct. 14, 4 p.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Systems Committee, Monday, Oct 14, 4 p.m., Conference Room E. Metropolitan Arts Advisory Committee, Tuesday, Oct. 1 5:15 p.m., Conference Room E. Transportation Advisory Board, Wednesday, Oct. 16, 2 p.m., Council Chambers. Environmental Resources Committee, Wednesday, Oct 16, 4 p.m., Conference Room E. Metropolitan and Community Development Committee, Thursday, Oct 17, 1:30 p.m., Council Chambers. Management Committee, Thursday, Oct 17, 3 p.m., Council Chambers. ay, Mond 5, CITY OF ,10-, CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council /Commissioners FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: October 9, 1985 SUBJ: HRA Transportation /Broadened Study Area This past month, the BRA authorized Brauer and Associates to broaden the scope of their downtown redevelopment study to encom- pass Highway 5 from 184th Street to old County 17. The purpose of the broadened study area was twofold: 1. Traffic Analysis /Intersection Design: The Highway Department is currently in a design phase for improving Highway 5 to a four lane standard. If we are to be effective in insuring that the design standards for each of our intersections is adequately considered by the Highway Department, we must be in a position to provide analysis /justification to MnDOT. Secondarily, the downtown plan establishes a new intersection at Highway 5 and begs the question as to the necessity or location of several of our existing intersections. The detailed traffic study by Benshoof and Associates will provide answers to these questions; and 2. Broadened Study Area: The BRA was desirous of insuring that the downtown plan would be consistent with overall _ redevelopment efforts leading into and from the downtown area. Accordingly, Brauer and Associates was retained to expand the scope of the downtown plan to include that area included in the traffic analysis section. Preliminary design plans for new Those plans have been prepared u'. effects of these assumptions, as points, will be presented by Mr. A copy of the preliminary design Wednesday evening. Highway 212 have been completed. Bing various assumptions. The well as initial intersection Hoisington and Mr. Benshoof. plans will be available r Exhibit 4 Recommende Phase II Objectives Brauer & Associates MEMORANDUM TO: CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL AND HRA FROM: FRED HOISINGTON SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL DATE: JUNE 28, 1985 At its May 30 meeting, the HRA requested Brauer & Associates to prepare, for discussion at the June meeting, a proposal for Phase II of the Downtown Redevelopment program. Based on discussions with staff, it was decided that a preliminary proposal be presented instead and, depending on the City's intent to proceed with a second phase, that a detailed proposal be presented at a subsequent meeting. As indicated in the final report of the Concept Planning phase, several activities must be undertaken over the next two years and many of those are proposed to begin in 1985. A refinement of the tasks to be completed are shown on the next page. I will be prepared to discuss each of these on Thursday. The major task, the Broadened Study Area Program including a traffic analysis, has been broken down into work assignments (see sheets 5 and 6). In addition, the City Engineer will prepare a detailed scope of services for the storm water /sanitary sewer study (drainage and utility study). It is anticipated that one of the engineering firms currently working with the City of Chanhassen will be selected to complete this task. It is essential that we go after there are still many unanswered utilities in the downtown area. whether a developer can even be upgrading the storm and sanitary H 7 00 a developer(s) ASAP, however, questions regarding drainage and We do not know at this time accommodated without first sewer systems. 7901 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 ❑ (612) 941 -1660 Furthermore, we believe it is necessary to lay the groundwork for developer solicitation. This work will include the updating of the McComb and Associates Market Study and the development of a plan which illustrates land use relationships and architectural images (Imaging Study). Both of these will be used to promote Chanhassen with developers. The revised timeline would be as follows: 1. Adopt Concept Plan Summer 1985 2. Plan For The Broadened Study Area (including negotiations with MnDOT and the RR, vis —a —vis STH 5 access) Summer 1985 3. Update Market Study September 1985 4. Drainage and Utility Study September 1985 5. Imaging Study (based on Market Study) September 1985 6. Developer Selection/ Project Feasibility Study January 1986 7. Street Feasibility Study Spring 1986 In addition, there is a continuing need to keep members of the business and development communities appraised of the Chanhassen program and schedule and progress toward implementation. Periodic reporting sessions and written communications will be required to satisfy this need. This could be either a Staff or Consultant responsibility. The following is a general outline of the objectives, scope and benefits of the Broadened Study Area services. The primary emphasis of this study will be transportation (street and access) _ planning. OBJECTIVES C C 1. To develop a land use and circulation plan that provides for functional linkages between downtown and the community as a whole. 2. To develop justification for and assume a pro- active role in the pursuit of another Highway 5 access to downtown. 3. To work with and acquire the concurrence of all agencies regarding Highway 5 accesses. 4. To reevaluate land uses in the general vicinity of downtown in light of recent downtown plan revisions. SCOPE /PRODUCTS BENEFITS 1. Analysis of the transportation system for the ex- panded downtown area from Eden Prairie to Old 17. 2. Development of a recommended land use and trans- portation plan for the entire study area including the resolution of existing concerns, road align- ments, lane requirements, and intersection loca- tions. 3. Development of preliminary cost estimates, sources of funding, and implementation program for the re- commended plan. 4. Involvement /Concurrence among affected agencies (MnDOT, Hennepin and Carver Counties) with recom- mended plan and implementation program. 5. Computerized roadway network and traffic forecast data base for use on a continuing basis. 1. Provide effective solution to current issues in- cluding STH 5 access, STH 101 and Co. Rd. 17/78th Street intersecttions. 2. Development of a definitive land use /transportation plan which is realistic and acheivable in meet- ing long term needs. 3. Concurrence among involved agencies regarding transportation system, improvements and implemen- tation. 4. Stimulation and streamlining of development review process. 5. Ease and reduced cost in assessing future changes in the land use and transportation system. 6. Reduced time and cost in the implementation of needed transportation improvements. Since transportation is such an important part of this effort, the consultant team will include Benshoof & Associates, Inc. and Brauer & Associates, LTD. Benshoof & Associates has computer capabilities that provide for the ultimate in traffic analysis and planning. Such a study could be completed by January 1986. If the City concurs with this course of action, the appropriate next step will be to request a detailed proposal from B &A including a work program, timelime and associated consulting fees for 1) Broadened Study Area Services, 2) Market Study Update, 3) Imaging Study, and 4) Continuing Services. A more general proposal could also be requested, for budgeting purposes, for the Developer Selection /Project Feasibility Study. Though a bit premature, the City could also authorize the City Engineer to take a proposal for the sanitary and storm sewer feasibility study. We look forward to being of continuing service to the City of Chanhassen. CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN AREA BROADENED STUDY AREA SERVICES OBJECTIVES N June 14, 1985 1. To develop a land use and circulation plan that provides for functional linkages between downtown and the community as a whole. 2. To develop justification for and assume a proactive role in the pursuit of another Hwy 5 access to downtown. 3. To work with and acquire the concurrance of all agencies regarding Hwy 5 accesses. 4. To reevaluate land uses in the general vicinity of downtown in light of recent downtown plan revisions. WORK PROGRAM 1. BASE MAPPING 2. COLLECT /REVIEW /ROUGH MAP BACKGROUND INFORMATION (Define goals, identify opportunities and constraints) a. Soils and Other Natural Features b. Topo c. Surface Water d. Drainage e. Land Use and Zoning f. Streets and Access g. Traffic (Volumes, capacities, projections, plans, right —of —way requirements, etc.) 3. POSTULATE PLAN ALTERNATIVES (2) 4. DESIGN TRAFFIC FORCASTING MODEL a. Define strategy, parameters and procedures with MnDOT and MetCo re: "windowing" of regional forcast model. b, Calibrate traffic forcasting model including 1) Development of network map 2) Trip generation based on existing land uses 3) Trip distribution 4) Alternative routings c. Traffic forcast of alternative plans 1) Generation 2) Distribution 3) Alternative routings 5. TEST PLANS a. Traffic analysis 1) Capacity analysis 2) Lane configuration 3) Safety /continuity b. Review with Planning Commission, City Council, other public agencies and the public ^ 6. PLAN REFINEMENT — Settle on One Plan _ 7. REPORT 8. PUBLIC HEARING 9. CONTINUING WORK WITH STAFF August 20, 1985 WORK SCHEDULE - CHANHASSEN BROADENED STUDY AREA Aug 19 Initial team meeting; review schedule; define study area limits; define goals of study. Aug 19 -30 Basemapping; meet with MnDOT & Eden Pr. Staff; Meet with Chanhassen City Staff to refine work program, define objectives, etc. Aug 26 - Sep 16 Collect /Review /Map background information, define opportunities and constraints; prepare memo on issues, objectives, criteria, constraints; meet with Central MnDOT office and Metro Council on process for traffic forecasting. Sep 17 or 18 Meet with City Staff. Sep 19 Meet with HRA & City Council (1) to review background info, goals, issues, criteria, etc. Sep 9 - Oct 10 Develop two plan alternatives; design traffic forecasting model, meet with MnDOT & Counties. Oct 10 Review alternatives with City Staff. Oct 17 Review alternatives with HRA & City Council (2). Agree on alternatives to be tested. Oct 18 - Nov 18 Test plan alternatives. Nov 19 or 20 Meet with City Staff. Nov 21 Meet with HRA & City Council (3) to review and select one plan and identify modifications. Nov 22 - Dec 16 Refine and detail plan and seek public agency concurrence. -- Dec 17 or 18 Meet with City Staff. Dec 19 Meet with HRA & City Council (4). ^ Dec 20 - Jan 13 Prepare implementation, staging, funding recommendations. ^ Jan 14 or 15 Meet with City Staff. Jan 16 Meet with HRA & City Council (5) to ^ present implementation, staging, funding recommendations; set public hearing date. Dec 9 - Jan 29 Prepare preliminary plan report. Jan 29 Submit preliminary plan report for ^ City Staff review. Jan 30 Notice Public Hearing. Feb 3 -7 Modify plan and make available for public hearing. - Feb 13 Conduct public hearing on plan (6). Feb 14 -19 Prepare final report and plan. Feb 20 Present final report to HRA & City Council (7). Lm \J \ {)f L Vi F V L AT I tl ❑CXRxx.ssEX D I � _J O 1 SYE.X SL. 11( i i Js x I •i 1 L• I I AT' I Er I Uj I I Ex.3e _ I II�R 1 2 ' Cx.xx.SSER r] ! HENNE SCOTT —r. i rssExs O p p I cb PR 11 /i I • I / . �L R,xI �1 I I • � S` " 1. '� `. ✓. t. �. , tl _ 1. E .XD[RLOM - -.lK I . Lp LA. — 1' O 11... fCLDYD O i- P DRL R LOLX IR.IRIC ,T11 169.212. © f f p 1 X SCOI \ Cpx4 � X MMCSDIL ` \ 1 I LIJ CLRE \ I\ .+ T.H. 212 CORRIDOR MAP • PROPOSED INTERCHANGE LOCATIONS 1, 1 1• SCALE u X000' I AUGUST, 1985 _ , CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council /Commissioners FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: October 9, 1985 SUBJ: Discussion Period Mayor Hamilton will chair this segment of the agenda. To main- tain some semblance of order (this agenda could easily get out of hand), I would suggest that questions regarding each of the following be taken in order followed by the Mayor attempting to find a general concensus regarding each. The items for which concensus is being sought include: a. Response to Metropolitan Council - Lake Ann. b. Direction to Hoisington /Staff - Development Framework Process. C. Direction to /from BRA: 1) Broaden Study Area 2) Re- analysis of Highway 212 Intersections