Loading...
1974 Comp Guide Plan pt 1C,victQ_ Plan REGULAR PLANNING C0114ISSION IZETIFPCI OC`OBER 13s 1971 n The regular meeting of the Planning Comnission was called to order by Chairman John Neveaux. The following members were present: Tom Gabbert9 Dan Herbst, Arnie 4ba9 John Neveaux, Nick 4aritz3 and Ord Passe. Jinn XLelke was absent. Councilman Steve Wolf and Commissioner Richard 14nnan were present. MINUTES: PLANNER: Members of Planning Commission., Village Councilq and rage Attorney will meet with the new planner to discuss the contract. A motion was made by Arnie Fgba and seconded by lard Passe to approve the September 28, 19719 special Planning Commission minutes as amended. &tion unanimously approved. TRANSPORTATION STUDY AND GUIDE PLAN: A motion was made by John Neveaux and secon y om ab ert t if -the 19?l traffic count is available the Planning Commission would request the Village Administrator prepare a comparison sheet showing State Highway 5 average daily traffic for 19659 19689 and 1971 and make this a part of this report and insert as page 7A of Generalized Guide Plan - Transportation Study. motion unanimously approved. A motion was made by John Neveaux and seconded by Arnie Ryba that the traffic count criteria that the ITLmesota State Highway Department uses to classify daily traffic, provisions and/or accounts, these facts be included in this report and page numbered 10A. Motion unanimously approved. ( l The Transportation Plan Summary of Recommendations, page 14, are listed according to priorities as follows: 1. Adhere to the "System D" corridor plan for T.H. 212 and 41. 2. Up -grade the traffic carrying capabilities of T.H. 5 Mithin the next five years to expressway standards, 3. Adopt and initiate improvements of the T.H. 101 and T.H. 5 intersection as per the interim solution (see page 8) until the final solution can be realized when T.H. 5 is upgraded to an expressway. 4. Extend Powers Boulevard to intersect with proposed T.H. 212. Construction should coincide with completion of T.H. 212. Construct a diamond interchange at the intersection on proposed T.H. 212 and proposed Powers Boulevard extension. 5. T.H. 101 is proposed to be re -aligned east of the Village of Chanhassen, 6, Obdsting T.H. 41 is proposed as a major collector route tying into the proposed diversified center. Further detailed studies will be required to determine the interchange design where it separates from the proposed alignment of new T.H. 41 freeway. 7. Extend lake Lucy Road to provide a grade separation crossing of proposed T.H. 41 freeway. 8. Existing T.H. 101 will become a minor collector route. It is proposed to intersect with proposed T.H. 212 not allowing access to or from either road but will be designed with grade separation crossing to allow cross traffic. 9, Existing 212-169 is proposed as a major collector route. 10. Construct all roads in Chanhassen according to these designated functional classification and design recommendations. Regular Planning Commission Minutes, October 13s 1971 -2- The Summary of Generalized CJui�ie Plan - Transportation Study ;page l�, are listed according to priorities as follows: to T.H. 5 immediate upgrading. 2. T.H. 101 relocation and T.H. 5 intersection, 3. Neighborhood 9 land use studies. 4, Central Business District Study to effectively determine its existing and future needs. 5. T.H. 41 and 7 intersection and land use, 6, Neighborhood 3 land use relationships at the diamond interchange® .70 Industrial Development - a study to determine future industrial space needs and available areas suitable for its development. 8. Jonathan New Torero development trends. 9. Neighborhood 5 land use relationships between Powers Boulevard and bake Ann. A motion was made by John Neveaux and seconded by Tom Gabbert to approve the preliminary Transportation Study and the updated Guide Plan and changes made October 13, 1971,, and request the Village Adminostrator to give final proof reading before it is sent to the Council, Nbtion unanimously approved. DAPS; The Administrator reported that the base map is being made up and =be mounted on a four map roller. This should be completed in two weeks. Other maps to be mounted are: Topography and Drainage Map, approved Zoning Map., and current Guide Plan Map. !\} CAAR LYNN SKETCH PLAN: A motion was wade by Tom Gabbert and seconded by WE l4arltz tat the Intent of the new Char -Lynn sketch plan is not the intent proposed by the Planning Commission and that the Planning Co=dssion ask the Administrator to meet with Char -Lynn to discuss our intent. Fbtion unanimously approved. DALE iaTANNINGER - CONDITIONAL USE PE1d4IT : The Administrator has contacted 4' nger 90 He Is In the process of preparing the necessary information to apply for a Conditional Use Permit. DISCUSSION - PLAN B: Councilman Steve dolf, the Administrator and Planning o ss on members discussed Plan B form of government and how it remould affect the Planning Commission. ORDINANCE 15: Fritz Coulter was present to ask the Planning Commission ror a3-`ri�` feation of the Ordinance. He was told that the Village Attorney has been asked by the Council for an opinion. The Administrator explained the history of the dump on the Bloomberg property, A public hearing on the Linsmayer preliminary plat and rezoning will be held Tuesday, October 26, 1971, at 7:30 pow A motion was made by Tom Gabbert and seconded by Arnie Wba. to adjourn. Meeting adjourned 10:30 pam. ® Jean Meuwi.ssen Secretary • - 1-N -`*i1 n VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN TRNASPGRTATION/'IHORGUGHFA.RES PLAN GENERALIZED GUIDE PLAN UPDATE f�l September, 1971 MASON, WEHRMAN, CHAPMAN ASSGXI,AT'ES, INC. Planning Consultants 1415 North Lilac Drive Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422 y 1 �Qnt. A. 1 NTRQDUCTi ON i B. TRANSPORTATION AND MOROUGHEAKE:3 PLAN Trunk Highway 41 Corridor 2 Trunk Highway 212 6 Trunk Highway 159 7 Trunk Highway 5 7 Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17) to Roadway Classificatiom lU C. THE GENERALIZED GLADE PLAN (Up -dated) 14 MAPS Sys tem D I Existing & Projected Traffic dal es 4 Transportation Plan s T. H. 101 15 Interchange 9 Guide Plan ld TRANSPORTA';.0-N/LAND USE PLAN A. INTRODUCTION The Village of Chanhassen in 1968 adopted a Generalized Guide Plan as a guide for future development of the Community. A part of this plan was to establish a trans- portation network providing convenient veh'scvlar access connecting through to vari- ous forms of land uses in proportion !o the degree of traffic generated and inter -traffic flow. As the 1968 plan indicated, changes and concepts would occur requiiin; the Guide Plan to be reconsidered and updated to meet these occurring changes which would 6,- in the best interest of the total community and its surrounding region. Recent changes in plans for the regional highway system have necessitated the Village of Chanhassen to conduct a re -study of the 1968 Guide Plan and subsequent charges and adjust ac- cordingly. This plan is intended to provide the community with a revised plan incor- porating the most recent data available to establish roadway reiocation and re--align- meat necessary. The highway system designations will be delineated to identify funct►csri and standordh for collector routes, secondary and primary thoroughfares, based on the Nations Func- tional Classification of Road Systems (also utilized by the State of Minnesota Highway Npartmen#). The State of Minnesota Highway [department has established Corridor Location for Trunk Highways 169, 212 and 41. The Study was conducted by Howard Needles Tarnrnen and Qergendoff Consulting Engineers. The repos-t summarizes concepts and procedures employer', findings, conclusions and recommendations for the proposed re- location of the above routes, There will be no attempt to reproduce the background data of the HNTB* study in this updating of the Guide Plan. A copy of the report is on file at the ChanAossen Village Hall. However, the materials presented were utilized to the upmost in determining the relationship of the existing road systems of the Village of Chanhassen corridors. B. TRANSPORTATION ARID THOROUGHFARES The Corridor Location Study for Trunk Highways 169, 212 and 41 conducted by IINTB' and the Minnesota Department of Highways reconunended their almost complete re- alignment and relocation to be implemented into what is referred to as System D. System D's establishment, effects the ExistiN Village of Chanhassen Generalized * HoworJ Needles Tarnmen and lUrg-Sr�d�o f, Consulting 16�ineers. Ph Guide Pion creating the necessity of its being ,e-studied and updated. System,V,( np 1) corridor proposal recornrrends that Trunk ljighway ? rt from its existing alignment approximately one mile north of Trunk Highway 5, proceed southeasterly across Trunk Highway 5 and follow County Roads 117 and 17 south to County Road 14. After crossing County Road 14, proposed Trunir Highway 41 would proceed southerly ccress existing Trunk Highway 212 need the Chicago and Northwestern Railway overpass and continue southeastery cac- cross the Minnesota River to join Trunk Highway 169 near existing County RoW 69. It is recommended that Trunk Highway 169 depart from its existing alignment approximately one mile southwest of Shakopee, proceed in an eastery direic- tion passing just north of Dean Lake and continue northeasterly to the inter- section of Trunk Highway 101 and County Road 25. Proposed Trunk High" 169 would then cross the Minnesota River and follow County Rood IS northerly to CSAH 62. Finally, itis recommended that Trunk Highway 212 follow the existing alignment from Cologne east to County Road 43 and then proceed in a northeasterly direc- tion, crossing Trunk Highway 41 approximotely one mile north of the Chaska High School. It is further recommended that the new alignment follow County Road 14 from Trunk highway 41 easterly to Lake Riley and then proceed north- easterly along the Chicago and Northwestern Railway to Trunk Highway 5. n From there the alignment follows Trunk Highway 5 easterly to 1-494 and exist- ing Trunk Highway 212/169 northeasterly. System '° J" ties the entire highway network together for the southwestern Metro- politan Area and maintaining proper relationships with outside areas. Systems I'D" allows the Village of Chanhassen to plan in the direction of anticipated growth in conformance with proposed land use patterns. Trunk Highway 41 Corridor Existing traffic volumes (Mop 2) Trunk Highway 41 hetween Trunk Highway 7 and Choska is increasing steadily. The route is the major connector of traffic from Highway 7 to U.S. 169 and 212 serving the increasing urbanization of northwest Chanhassen and the City of Chasko. increased pressures are being asserted on the existing two -lame rural designed road. Minnesota Highway Department statistics indicate that 1967 ACT* was approximately 2,000-2,200. It is anticipated today (19: 1) that the ADT could already be over 3,,000 in this northern section of Trunk Highway 41 and 2,500-3,000 in the southern section. * A T- verage Daily Tro f i c 0 -2- • VRIAGE OF CHANHASSEN r) 212 VILLAGE OF CHAMIASSEN 17 1480 15200 13 -0 0 -0 is TWO WAY AVIINAGO BAISY TRAFFIC EA D,v.L----J0000 INTSIRCHANGS 00 tvg CoNfloitio Accass fACUITMS-0 7.0 4NURCH44yell WITH tocAl Acclst 709 n. - 77 VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN isoos 54010 i8clao I'l 71Y n IT 384 fit l3lem Be"Do P) fc-4 AV10AW DAIV owy, pop#, Projecting population growth based w the knowt- actofs of potent; gal pio=wth of the Southwestern Metropolitan Area Trunk 1•iigkwTy 41 vwiil be ti-& pi'irslr,sy norih- south traffic corridor serving the Chanlressen, Chaska and the Lake Minnetonko Areas. The Minnesota Kghway Department ,projects almost 18,000 vehicle ADT in the north section of Trunk Highway 41, 12,800 in the central section and 7,200 in the southern section. It will be necessary to upgrade Trunk Highway 41 (Mop 3) to freeway status so it is capable of carrying the projected traffic volumes. The proposed re -location of Trunk Highway 41 is to swing south of the present highway alignment from about Trunk Highway 7, along eastern Chaska following the approximate alignment of the present CSAH 17 and 117. Trunk Highway 41 will be intersected by pro- posed Trunk Highway 212 west of the top of the duff Golf Course before contin- uing straight south crossing the Minnesota River approximately between Chaska and Shakopee. The establishment of the Trunk Highway 41 corridor effects the Generalized Guide Plan in a minor capacity, that being an access and interchange problem on the north side of the area designated as Diversified Center. The existing Guider Plan illustrates a primary thoroughfare along the some general alignment as proposed Trunk Highway 41 with major interchanges. Neighborhood boundaries are af- fected only slightly by the improvement in the alignment, Proposed Trunk high- way 41 upgrading and realignment benefits Chanhassen considerably in that it provides a major north -south traffic arterial for the entire west side of the Vil- lage. 1 Trunk Highway 212 Existing Trunk Highway 212 which descends down the Minnesota River Bluffs in a parallel route to the Minnesota River will be realigned along the approximate route of CSAH 14 in Chanhassen. The projected traffic volume ( 1985) after com- pletion of the highway system will range from L2,000 to 17,000 ADT. Existing ADT is now about 5,300 at Chaska and 8,900 at t e aakopee intersection (U.S. 169, 212 junction). After completion of the new corridor systems the present U.S. 212-169 route will be downgraded from a Federal System to the State or County System. Traffic along the old route will likely remain at its present volume or slightly less. This traffic -however, will be more of a local nature, whereas the new 212 corridor will carry primarily regional traffic. The proposed 212 corridor may create some alignmWnt- land use relationship problems, which may be further identified when a center line/ right-of-way has been established.* *Preliminary engineering studies are currently now under way &j HNTOand-the State of Minnesota Highway Department. -6- NIL .1'") into*r6onges proposed along Trunk Highway 212 in Chorth assen are: 1., Trunk Highway 21.2.-41 Interchange -A designed interchange more complex than the standard full clover -leaf capable of transferring 212 and 41 traffic without redaction of the freeway speed and movement capability. 2. A diamond interchange al, the intersection of proposed County Road 17 extention is proposed. County Road 17 is designated as the major north --south collector route serving central Chanhassen between Trunk Highway 212 and Trunk Highway 7. Trunk Highwrsy 169 Existing Trunk Highway 169 is merged with Trunk Highway 212 from the east until they separate near the intersection of Trunk Highymy 101. Trunk highway 212 continues southwest to Chaska and Trunk Highway 169 swings south across the Minnesota River into Shakopee. System "D" proposes the relocation of Trunk Highway 169 to follow Hennepin County Road #18 alignment south across the Minnesota River then by-passing Shakopee on the south joining existing 169 at the proposed junction of Trunk Highway 41. The proposed Trunk Highway 169 realignment will not affect the Chanhassen Guide Plan. Trunk Highway 5 Trunk Highway 5 is the primary east -west thoroughfare through north -central Chanhassen F� serving the primary functions of the Community: (1) the General Business Core, and (2) l r the Industrial Areas. Existing traffic volumes (1968 figures, counts for 1971 are not available) ranges from 5,650 ADT on the west to 7,450 on the east.* It could be assumed that the ADT on T.H. 5 has increased at least by 30-50`36 since 1968 based on the amount of development which has recently occurred in Chanhassen and increased through traffic generated west of the Village. Projected 1985 traffic projections for T.H. 5 range from 15,200 on the west to 18,000on the east. This projection for T.H, on the east indicates a heavier 1985 traffic flow than that projected for proposed T.H. 212 can the east which is scheduled for construction within the next five years if state priorities remain as scheduled. Upgrading of T.H. 5 to expressway standards is estimated to be 10-15 years away accord- ing to the Minnesota Highway Department. It is evident that unless T.H. 5 is given a higher priority date for up -grading, serious traffic problems will occur in Chanhassen whichwillineffectkinder or effect its development potential. Interchange problems ►iow exist and withadded volumes these problems will compound. It is also recommended that Chanhassen, along with Eden Prairie and Victoria jointly exert their efforis to have T.H. 5 upgraded within the next five year., to an expressvrcry with studies of this possikility to begin as soon as ssible. Until upgrading of Trunk Highway 5 accurs the following interm circulation plan is proposed:' e Minnesota Highway Department estimates t t Trunic. Hi-qhvA::y 3 wi l l Te upgra e-d 0 to expressway standards in about 10 to 15 years. -7- 1. That the intersection of Highway 101 and Highway 5 be upgraded to permit safe turning functions. This will involve deve!oping large, stacking lanes on Highway 5 for left hand turns onto north and south bound Highway 101; free movement right hand turn lanes should be improved to provide decelera- tion space also for turns onto Highway 101; acceleration lanes should be provided on Highway 5 from Highway 101 for both east and west bound traffic off Highway 101. 2. A service or frontage drive should be installed and right-of-way secured where necessary before any additional road front platting is approved. 3. Access should be closed from Chanhassen Estates to Highway 5, reoriented to the service drive and temporarily exited to Highway 5 approximately 800 feet east of the present exit. This is necessary, to permit proper visual con- trols; locating and access point for enough from the westward grade and southern bend in Highway 5 to permit entrance onto the highway safely. 4. The south side frontage road at Highway 101 is shown on a general align- ment with Highway 5 to the eastern edge of the ball field. At this point the drive turns southward, to the southern edge of the ball field - Legion hall property, than turns westward to Highway 101. The intersection of the frontage road with Highway 101 is at a point approximately 300 feet south of the center line of Highway 5. This depth is necessary to permit lane stacking on Highway 101 without conflicting with service drive traf- fic. Three hundred feet is also the minimum distance that an entrance road should be from an expressway lone at the point of intersection with a grade separation crossing as is proposed in than feature circulation plan. While existing service road traffic dc&sn't warrant quite t-hesystem herein proposed, the future development of the south side of highway 5 decries the urgency of a service road system and interchange upgrade before further development occurs. The final solution to the Trunk Highways 5 and 101 will require further detailed studies, however the final solution should incorporate the following: (Map 4) 1. Highway 5 is to be upgraded to expressway standards with limited access points as designated on the guide Plan. 2. Frontage roads will be necessary, paralleling Highway 5. 3. Access will be limited to the proposed diamond interchange west of Chan- hassen's commercial area (County Road 17 and Trunk Highway 5 intersec- tion) and a diamond interchange at the east Village limits where the Eden Prairie Parkway interchange is proposed. 4. Frontage road (south side) will parallel Trunk Highway 5, and as iri the inte.rian pro- posal, swing south and west around the baseball field and American Legion Hail; s, north of the existing fame house on Trunk Highway ) Ol . 5. The frontage road will channel traffic west to Highway 101 for access to the Village proper, and east to the diamcnd interchange. b. The purpose of the proposed traffic flow diagram are as follow.: a. It splits the access function to tvro district areas with adequate distanco between. b. Trunk Highway 10) (from the south) will become a grade separation crossing with no occess to or from Trunk Highway 5. c. Frontage roads will parallel Trunk Highway 5 in a close proximity to the highway except at Highway 101 and at the parkway where the road flares out to at least 300 feet separations from the closest lanes of the highway to allow for proper access, vehicular stacking and visual control. Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17) The extension of Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17) to intersect with proposed T.H. 212 should coincide with the completion of T.H. 212. This will enable the Village of Chanhassen to complete its central north -south circulation tying the southern part of the community with the north and relieving the traffic burden on T.H. 101 which is proposed to be down -graded to a minor collector mute. Roadway Classifications The present guide Plan designates two major fortes of highway classifications: (1) pri- mary routes and (2) secondary routes. The primary mutes designated in the plan are proposed to be developed to expressway standards. The secondary traffic systems are routes to be four lane highways with control access, limited primarily to collector routes from the residential neighborhoods. All other routes indicated on the Guide Plan are collector routes and local minor streets. The up-datad plan sees It necessary for the Villags to classify all its roads in relation to the lard -use functions. The functiorxal classification is based on the Nation's Functional Classification of Road Systems as odopted by the Minnesota department of 0 -10- rNO ie Highways, The system of h;gkways remains in two majo, categories: i FNim:ray- and (2) secondary. The Primary System consists of (a) expressways and (b) freeways. Freeways have luIly con ro ed access and no grade crossings, while expressways may have only partial access controls and occassional grade crossings. Primary roads are high capacity roadways which are expected to carry large vo!urnes of traffic at Bich speeds. These routes are metropolitan or regional in significance cartying much through traffic. Locally these roads will serve major land use areas within, the Village of Chanhassen and tie them into the fabric of the metropolitan area. Ac- cess controls, separated grade interchanges, and rwiti-lane divided road surfaces are employed to expedite heavy volumes of traffic. The right -of --ways should be designed so that in the future, a partisan of these might be utilized for a mass transit system. Roadways in the Village of Chanhassen which are classified as primary on the up- dated Generalized Guides Plan are: Trunk highway 41 (Freeway) Trunk Highway 212 (Freeway Trunk Highway 5 (Expressway) Trunk Highway 7 (Expressway) Cross Section Standard UL _)Irl%1Dt.r Secondary roadway routes consist of five sub—cotegories. (1) t•'tajor Collectors, � or o actors, (3) Local Streets, (4) frontage ot Service Bonds and (5) Parkways. 1. Major Collectors - are relatively high capacity roads supplementing the patter;­oTTf_a0ed access highways. They provide for relatively rapid move- ment, but the traffic volumes do not warrant the design standards of limited access highways. Intersections with roads of equivalent stature will general- ly be at grade, sometimes signalized. The collect or distribute traffic through- out the Community within the interstices of thoroughfares and limited access highways. Roods designated as Major Collectors in the Village of Chanhmsen are: a. Hazeltine Boulevard (Existing Trunk Highway 41) b. Flying Cloud Chive (Existing Trunk Highway 212 and 169) c. Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17 and proposed extension) d. Eden Prairie Porkway (Minnetonka to Lake Riley) e, Lyman Boulevard Cross Section Standard 2. Minor Collectors - are the next step down in speed, vo u . Ordinarily ffi y are contained within the community although some may extend across Village lines. Access to private property is permitted for large develop- ments but is discouraged for small individual ownerships. The use of frontage roads or service drives is most desirable to service development along these routes. Sign control measures, street alignment and cross -sectional design should p►o- vide for moderate speeds and volumes, but should not be lovish enough to en- courage through traffic within a neihborhood. a. Minnewashto Parkway (CSAH 15) b. Lake Lucy Road C. Loreado Drive d. Old T.H. 101 (Great Plains Boulevard) e. Pioneer Trail f. Audubon Road 0 -12- n Crass Section Standard 3. } Parkways - are streets which can be several different classifications if they oreWparticular aesthetic quality or are links serving the Chanhassen linear park system. Major collectors, minor collectors and local streets are each utilized in various parts of the Village if they meet the criteria. Cross Section Standard 4. Local Roads - These streets should serve only as access to abutting residential properties. A narrower paved surface is usually sufficient for this if the street layout discourages through traffic and if there is at least on off-street parking space for each abutting lot. l I, 1 1 t Cross Section Standard ®OMMUMA M 0 -13- TRANSPORTATION PLAN SUMW-kRY OF RECOMMENDATIONS o Adhere to tl,e "System V corridor plan for T.H. 212 and 41. o Existing T.H. 4) is proposed as a major collector route tying into the proposed diversified center, Further detailed studies will be required to determine the interchange design where it separates from the proposed alignment of new T.H. 41 freeway. o Existing 212-169 is proposed as a major collector route. o Construct a diamond interchange at the intersection on proposed T.H. 212 and proposed Powers Boulevard extension. o T.H. 101 is proposed to be re -aligned east of the Village of Chanhassen. o Existing T.H. 101 will become a minor collector route. It is proposed to inter- sect with proposed T.H. 212 not allowing access to or from either road but will be designed with grade separation crossing to allow cross traffic. o Initiate studies to up -grade the traffic carrying capabilities of T.H. 5 within the next five years. o Adopt and initiate improvements of the T.H. 101 and T.N. 5 intersections as (� per the interim solution until the final solution can be realized when T.H. 5 is upgraded to an expressway. o Extend Powers Boulevard to intersect with proposed T.H. 212. Construction should coincide with completion of T.H. 212. o Construct all roads in -Chanhassen according to these designated functional classification and design recommendations. o Extend Lake Lucy Road to provide a grade separation crossing of proposed T.H. 41 freeway. 0 -14- C. THE GENERAt 12ED GUIDE PLAN i (Up -dated) The establishment of the proposed Trun, Highway cnrrldor routes fo, 212, 169 and 41 have not greatly affected the existing neighboahood Oiucture as depicted on tf,e existing Generalized Guide Plan (maps). Most changes occurring for the neighbor- hoods are boundary adjustments necessary to accommoda3e the changes of the inter- nal traffic routes, their access and the interchange areas with the primary roadways. The neighborhood structure as designed in the past consisted primarily of single- family sub -divisions provided with the normal amenities such as schools, parks and a structured road system. The desirability of si ;vgle-family housing still re- mains strong. However the concept of improved environmental liveability has brought the Planned Unit Development (PUD) concept into existence. The Plan- ned Unit Development can occur in a variety of housing types: single --family, multiples, townhouses, condominium, mobile home or other pre -constructed uses. The most successful PUD developments have applied o combination of two or more of the above mentioned housing types. It is anticipated that the Village of Chanhassen will experiences a heavy concen- tration of Planned Unit Developments encompassing large land acreages. The lo- cation of these developments should be carefully studied by the Village before dev- elopment is accepted to assure proper land use relationships and that it can be served efficiently by the transportation system. Development of the 'Village of Chanhassen will continue to occur primarily in the (� areas which can be provided sewer and water. As the trunk lines are constructed and extended,naturally development will increase. As is now the Village of Chan- hassen's policy new development which cannot be served by public sewer and water or cannot provide acceptable private systems is discouraged. The Generalized Guide Pion designates neighborhoods. This up -dating report retains the twelve neighborhoods, however changes or recommendations are noted as follows below. (Refer to the Guide Plan). Neighborhood 1 0 Upgrade the intersections of Minnewashta Parkway (CSAH 15) at Trunk High- ways 7 and 5. Neighborhood 2 • The east boundary line of tsleig 16orhood 2 is extended east to the proposed alignment of Trunk Highway 41. 0 W15- a fhe access to the -service commerciai/m+:Itiple --rea r ssgnat,!d irp i �.'r. • _ru:�o:c:, , of the intersection, of Trunk Highway 7 and Trunk Highway 41 should t„- 'irr:i ted to Trunk Highway 7. Neighborhood 3 ® The west boundary line is designated as the proposed alignment of Trunk Highway 41. • Extend Lake Lucy road (minor collector) west to the west M-Annetonka Junior High School and connect neighborhood 2 to Lake Lucy Road by extending it across T.H. 41 as a grade separation crossing with no direct access to T.H. 41. • A diamond interchange providing access to and from the proposed Diversified Center from Trunk Highway 41. This intersection will provide the neighborhood access to the center as well as to the highway. Neighborhood 4 e Upgrade Lake Luch Road from a local street designation to a minor collector road from Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17) to T.H. 41 as proposed in the Transportation Plant. Neighborhood 5 • Construct a frontage road paralleling Trunk Highway 5 between Caalpin Roar! (County Road 117) and Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17). The road is proposed as a major coi- lector route. The road will provide good periphery traffic circulation for the areas west of Lake Lucy and Ann Lake and serve Lake Ann Park. Neighborhood d • Larado Drive will be extended north and upgraded to a minor collector classification. Larado Drive in the subdivision adjacent to lotus Lake should be renorned. Neighborhood 7 e Down -grade Trunk Highway 101 to a minor collector. T.H. 101 will be re-routed east of Chanhassen. T.H. 101 in Chanhassen will be turned back to the County. Neighborhood 8 • No changes are recommended, -16- C� NeiQ*rhood 9 o The trend of Planned Unit Development is evident here and shovId be encouraged to continue as such. o Trunk Highway 101 south of Trunk Highway 5 will receive added vehicular pres- sures as development increases. o Existing Trunk Highway 101 is designated as a minor collector road. It is recom- mended that it be turned back to the County or the Village. o Access and Intersection problems between Trunk Highway 5 and Trunk Highvmy 101 are found on page 6 of this report. hleiphborhood 10 o The final alignment of the right-of-way for proposed Trunk Highway 212 has not yet been established. Traffic flow diagrams indicate that the interchange will have to be more sophisticated than the standard full clover -leaf design to allow the transfer of Trunk Highway 41 traffic to Trunk highway 212 or vice -versa. o The area at the northeast intersection of Trunk Highway 41 and 212 is changed from service commercial to multiple residential due to access restraints not com- patible to the requirements for it. Access to the neighborhood is via proposed Highway 17 extension and Lyman Boulevard from the north and east and realigned Pioneer Trail (CSAH 14) which connects with proposed Highway 17 on the east and with Chaska on the west. The realigned mad will not have access to pro- posed Trunk Highway 41. Neighborhood 11 o Neighborhood I 1 remains almost virtually in tact. The final right -of -war loca- tion will not adversely affect the development of the neighborhood. Neighborhood 12 o Neighborhood 12 will experience increased development pressures due primarily to the Tap -of -The -Bluff Golf Course being located there. However, the plan- ned trunk sewer line is not scheduled for completion until after 1980, requiring large lot development. o The neighborhood north of the Chicago and Northwestern Railroad is designated as single-family residential. -II3- F 4w, C-7'evc. A'am-A GmAde Pinn r-.s Wifli -i ..41 in -ehis rc�',Yjrt reflacij 0 . . e C; changes !0 ;-he existing plan nAd tcends'ei-Alas oy-a Occurring. The revised plot, aljovA t'jo ,.orr i ,xnunity to re-aditist it -a pricdiks and 1i,- studies and is initicte mog-e docilled swulies $o 5o!v,-,- prc�b�cm areas, TO !,:- Stud;e-, sl,-'Uld be done In a swat ma tic manner of pricr, f Reco-gime Mad spt!:cic I s i, y ur c-u, 5 ud Foil-.Ws- i 2. T. H. i 014 re -localion amd' V. H 5 i nt,,21-se,7 tien, 3. Atftugvo 4. T.H. 41 air:d omi E it S. Ne;ghborrhorA *3 ZMMj ma,).iandil'ps of the 611cma-W intarchange.- *6. Neighboriveid 05 I*nd u-,� relafio-63MV6 belmoew. Po-vwrs BOUNVara ctred" Lake Ann. 07 Neivhbar*od 9 Inn -a pit,.-! Contmil B-jitine5t, D4trict Saidy -;y ifecovei 6t fmmi i exisfing 0 houre needs 'r.-t:Aled I*,-,d a:* ?--tudj shojld 6o rmovC. :A sari ,hirw, rjojo r� ". to provjje .- cjjja(;--r relalizmhip between kind C'D";, s -rs. feu'!- and c!anc.i Ti-x� 1. `1%ittage o f Ckan�iaJJen Box 147 Ckanhaaaen., ✓ iinneaota 55317 Zelep%ione: 474-5020 (Official Publication) VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN HENNEPIN AND CARVER COUNTIES MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON CHANHASSEN GENERALIZED GUIDE PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN. That the Village Council of the Village of Chanhassen, Minnesota, will meet on Monday, the 20th day of October, 1969, at 7:00 p.m. at the Chanhassen Village Hall in said Village for the purpose of holding a public hearing on the Generalized Guide Plan. The Village Council will present this Guide Plan as a first step in the formulation of a Compre- hensive Plan for the Village of Chanhassen. All persons interested may appear and be heard at said time and place. Dated this 29th day of September, 1969. BY ORDER OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL ADOLPH TESSNESS Clerk -Administrator Publish: (October 9, 1969) Mte laateat Crowing Suburb Jn Zhe Southwest Capitol Square Building, Cedar Street at 10th Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Area 612, 227-9421 June 10, 1969 Mayor Eugene Coulter Village of Chanhassen Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 RE: Chanhassen Community Growth Plan Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 Dear Mayor Coulter: At its meeting of June 5, 1969, the Metropolitan Council considered the report of its Referral Committee on the Village of Chanhassen Community Growth Plan. The plan was received by the Council on January 30, 1969. Under the provisions of the Metropolitan Council Act, contiguous municipalities and affected independent agencies were notified of the submission of this plan and allowed the opportunity to request a hearing. Eden Prairie did request a hearing on the basis of its concern over the proposed industrial use of land south of TH 5 in eastern Chanhassen, adjacent to Eden Prairie. The requested hearing was held by the Referral Committee on March 6, 1969. A separate report on this dispute, which the Referral Committee is attempting to mediate, has been reviewed by the Committee and representatives of the communities, but is being held pending receipt of additional information. The Metropolitan Council Act also provides that a community which submits a municipal comprehensive plan for review cannot take any action to implement the plan until a 60 day time period has elapsed. Since the Council review of this plan ran well over the allotted time, Chanhassen has been free to proceed with the implementation of this plan without further action by the Council. However, since An Agency —atea — --rainate the riannine and Develop..-- —she '1'wau a iuicz5wzGtropolitan Area Comprising: Anoka County 0 Carver County o Dakota County 0 Hennepin County 0 Ramsey County 0 Scott County 0 Washington County Mayor Eugene Coulter June 10 , 1969 comprehensive plans are concerned with long-range development, comments and recommendations received after the required 60 day waiting period should be of value in the community's consideration of long-range development proposals and in the formulation of additional planning studies. The attached comments were developed in cooperation with Mr. Adolph Tessness, Village Administrator, and were submitted in a preliminary form to the Village for review by the Village Council and Planning Commission. The attached recommenda- tions were not reviewed by the community but are based on the approved comments. After consideration of the Referral Committee report, the Council voted to transmit to the Village of Chanhassen the attached comments and recommendations on the Chanhassen Community Growth Plan. Sincerely, METROPOLITAN COUNCIL B)Jairman es L. Hetland, Jr. ' JLH: dms cc: Mr. Adolph Tessness, Administrator Mr. Marvin Borgelt, Metropolitan Council District 1 Business Item F-2b METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 22.7-9421 REPORT OF THE REFERRAL COMMITTEE TO: Members of the Metropolitan Council June 3, 1969 SUBJECT: Comments and Recommendations on the Chanhassen Community Growth Plan Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 At meetings on April 17, May 1, and May 29, 1969, the Referral Committee considered the staff analysis of the Community Growth Plan submitted by the Village of Chanhassen on January 30, 1969. Present at the meeting on April 17 were Village Administrator Adolph Tessness and Mr. Scholer, a member of the Chanhassen Planning Commission. Mr. Tessness was also present at the meeting on May 1, 1969. The staff analysis of the Chanhassen plan has gone through two revisions. The first re-. vision was on the basis of comments made at the meeting on April 17; the second revision after review of the staff analysis by the Chanhassen Village Council and Planning Commission. The Referral Committee has been informed that the attached comments are now acceptable to the Village. The attached recommendations were not reviewed by the community but are based on the approved comments. After submission of the Chanhassen plan, contiguous municipalities and affected independent agencies were notified of its receipt and given the opportunity to request a hearing, under the provisions of the Metropolitan Council Act. Eden Prairie did request a hearing on the basis of its concern over the proposed industrial use of land south of TH 5 in eastern Chanhassen adjacent to Eden Prairie;. The requested hearing was held by the Referral Committee on March 6, 1969. A separate report on this dispute, which the Referral Committee is attempting to mediate, was prepared and has been reviewed by both communities but is being held pending receipt of additional information. After discussion of the revised staff analysis and suggested recommendations at its meeting on May 29, 1969, the Referral Committee adopted the following statement: -2- "The Referral Committee recommends that the comments and recommendations on the Chanhassen Community Growth Plan be approved and forwarded to the Village." Respectfully submitted, E. Peter Gillette, Jr. , Chairman Marvin Borgelt Dennis Dunne Rev. Norbert Johnson Milton L. Knoll, Jr. George Martens George Pennock /dms 6.3.69 NOTE: As a result of the experience with the Chanhassen plan review, the Referral Committee has changed the procedure on the review of comprehensive plans and has asked that the staff analysis be submitted to the community for its reaction prior to consideration by the Referral Committee. This is basically the procedure which is now being followed on controversial highway referrals. In this way the differences between the staff and community views on plan proposals can be reviewed and Explained in the staff analysis prior to consideration by the Referral Committee. 1 W METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227-9421 Referral Committee Recommendations on the Chanhassen Community Growth Guide Plan Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 1. Chanhassen should develop and adopt development policies and standards to guide development at the local level, supplementing recommended metropolitan policies and standards. 2. After completion of the Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendoff study of this section of the Metropolitan Area, the Chanhassen thoroughfare plan should be re-examined in the light of the recommendations resulting from that study and with the objective of making the Chanhassen thoroughfare pattern more compatible with recommended standards contained in the Joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide. 3. Commercial use of the land below the river bluffs should be examined to eliminate from this use areas subject to flooding and to assure that the commercial development permitted will have adequate highway access at times of high water. Chanhassen is urged to make use of the 1969 flood plain management legislation. 4. A study of utility services should be completed as soon as possible, especially since construction in the Southwest Service Area will make interceptor sewers available to the community in the near future and this will accelerate development requiring such utilities. 5. The proposed pattern of residential development should be examined with the objective of increasing the flexibility of development through more extensive use of planned unit development and other flexible controls. The use of some amenity sites for other than single-family housing should also be considered. /dms 6.3.69 ''\METROPOLITAN COUNC Suite 101 Caritol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227-9421 Referral Committee Comments on the Chanhassen Community Growth Plan Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 I. General Comments on Plan's Compatibility with Metropolitan Development Guide In general, the Chanhassen Plan does not specify short-range and long-range development goals, the latter of which might be compared with those contained in the joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide. Nor are development policies and standards stated in a way which would permit direct comparison with policies and standards contained in the Development Guide, with some exceptions . Where these policies and standards are identified there are some conflicts with those developed at the metropolitan level, as identified below. 91__4The Village has pointed out that the Chanhassen Guide Plan is only a generalized plan. comprehensive and not a com 4P zve plan. The Village has indicated its general agreement with QI the joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide and the coordinating role of the Metropolitan Council. II. Comments on Specific Elements in the Plan A. Transportation As shown on the Guide Plan map, the existing and proposed highway routes may not be completely compatible with the plan's land use proposals if both 5 and 41 are developed as freeways which do not provide land access. If this is the case, the large commercial center as shown in the northeast quadrant of the cloverleaf inter- change of these highways will be difficult to serve because it is not directly adjacent to the closest thoroughfare which does provide land access. This problem would be overcome if either 5 or 41 are developed as expressways or lower level facilities which do provide limited land access, or if the commercial center is enlarged so that it directly abuts the road curving around northeast of the site. Development Guide standards call for a distance of four to six miles between paralleling metropolitan routes (freeways and expressways) in suburban areas. While "primary" highways are identified on the Chanhassen plan, and shown as at least four lane divided highways with the symbolism used, it is not always clear whether they fall within the category of expressways and freeways or are lower level facilities. Because of the interchanges shown on the plan, both TH 5 and the proposed U.S. 212 are assumed to be freeways which would be closer than four miles. However, it is recognized that these two routes, six miles apart west of Chaska, are forced by the Minnesota River to draw closer together in Chanhassen prior to their convergence in Eden Prairie. Based on the location of interchanges, it appears that only TH 41 would be considered a north -south freeway. If the other north -south primary routes are expressways, the spacing between them would not be in conformance with Development Guide standards; if they are lower level facilities, there would be no conflict with the standards. Guide standards do call for limiting access to freeways so that interchanges will occur only every two to three miles in suburban areas, rather than the. more common one mile spacing shown on TH 5 and U.S. 212. The results of the Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendoff study of highways in this section of the Metropolitan Area may necessitate some rethinking of the Chanhassen thoroughfare plan. -2- B.. Commercial Development The identified commercial areas in the Chanhassen plan are located where it does not appear they will create any land use conflicts, and they are adequately integrated with proposed and existing transportation networks with the exception noted above. All of the proposed commercial centers are located on major crosstown routes. One concern is the possibility that a portion of the general commercial area south of the bluffs along the Minnesota River may be subject to flooding or have its access cut off if there is extensive flooding. Chanhassen will be incorporating into its new zoning ordinance a flood plain zone, with restrictive, permissive, and warning area regulations and boundaries as indicated by the Lower Minnesota Watershed District. However, the Council staff wishes to point out that these Watershed District regulations axe not based - on a scientific approach to flood plain management and are inconsistent with the recommended policy in the joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide, the report of the Open Space Advisory'Committee, and with current state legislation on flood plain regulation. C. Industrial Development The Chanhassen plan does provide for a reasonable total amount of industrial land although some of the areas identified are below the 200 acre minimum recommended in the joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide. The shallow industrial areas adjacent to the railroad in the eastern portion of the village appear somewhat questionable, except insofar as they provide for existing industry. The location of the major industrial areas shown on the Chanhassen plan is in general agreement with the major industrial site shown on the joint Program Constellation Cities scheme, although slightly farther west. The possibility of consolidating industrial development into an area south of TH 5 between the two major north -south highways should be considered. This site would also have rail access. It is recognized that the industrial areas as shown on the Chanhassen plan might be served earlier by sewers than a site farther east, that soil conditions might make the westerly site more desirable, and that the relationship with adjoining industrial development in Chaska may be a factor in favor of the westerly site. -3- The industrial areas as proposed do take advantage of highway facilities that provide cross directional movement and they are aligned with the proposed future transit routes as shown in the Metropolitan Development Guide. However, there is no identification of exclusive light and heavy industrial areas nor does the plan contain any development or performance standards. D. Utilities ' The matter of providing utility service to Chanhassen is not discussed in this report. The provision of central water and sewer services is the key to development at urban densities and the rate at which these could be provided in Chanhassen Nand t1te location of the major interceptors and other facilities would dictate the rate and direction'of urban growth. The Village indicates that a comprehensive sanitary sewer and water system study has been initiated. E. Housing While it may be only a bit of drafting license, neighborhood boundaries as shown on the plan exclude the multiple -family areas, related commercial development, and planned unit development housing which should all be integrated into the neighborhoods. For the most part, multiple -family housing has been clustered around commercial centers, which is desirable to improve the vitality of the commercial development and to make it readily available to the residents of higher density areas. However, such multiple -family housing should not be used in a negative way to provide a "'buffer" between single-family development and non-residential areas. More areas could be identified as potential sites for planned unit development to permit greater flexibility of development with a greater range of housing types and more innovative designs in each neighborhood. At the same time, there is some question about the use of planned unit development in the two rather small areas adjacent to the University Arboretum, since these may not be large enough for effective use of .this type of development. No provision has been made for higher density development in any of the amenity sites such as lakefronts, rive r bluffs, high points, or other sites with special attractions, as recommended in the Metropolitan Development Guide, although there is some tie-in with the linear open space along the drainage ways. The Village has indicated that some of these problems will be overcome by the proposed zoning ordinance now being prepared. F. Open Space and Natural Resources The plan identifies flood plains, drainage ways, various types of parks, and linear open space associated with natural patterns and linkages. A number of the openmace elements in the Chanhassen plan do have possible regional significance and the plan does provide for adequate access'to these sites. There is no identification of historic sites and areas, native environments, steep slopes, wetlands, or such amenity elements as,skylines, views, and scenic areas or potential roadsides. S+' -4- However, since review of the Chanhassen Community Growth Plan, the Metro- politan Council has received a copy of the Chanhassen Park Study, which does provide information regarding the above mentioned omissions. This information includes maps of natural donditions, development status, and a Park and Open Space Plan. The inclusion of natural resource elements and allocation of recreation facilities is in conformance with the joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide and the report on the Metropolitan Open Space System. The specific open space classifications and proposals differ in definition from that of the Metropolitan Open Space System report, but appropriately reserve the critical elements of Open Space and Natural Resources. /dms 6.3.69 V ^ :'ROPCtL';'TAN CvuN ;, L `:.3t.ltoa Srjuare Building, SF.int F'aul, Njir;.r:esota 55101. RE -PORT OF THE REFERRAL COMMITTEE TO: Members of tbE.- Metropolitan Council June 3, 1969 sU13JSCP: Goon„ ends and Recc;mmen:iatlons on the ".Iiarhasse , Community G►rowvtit 1-lan Met-.gpolitan Council Referral F ,i No. ::•75 At meetings o;7 April 17, May 1 , and May 29, 1969, the Referr.il Comin> ttee cons -cc.red the staff analysis c:f the Community Growth ")Ian submitted by --he Vlage of Chavf.�,Ssen on January 30, 1969. Frasent at the meeting on kp,i? 17 were 'llliaya Administrate — Adolph Tessness and Mr. Schr.ler, a member of Fife C:havhass Planrur g c,onmiss.-m. Mr. Tessness vrais also present at the nieetl,tg on H,Iay 1, 1969. The staff analysis o^ tiv� Chanhassen plan nas gone thz)igh rev►:sk,is. The A —,:-I :e-- trIsion war; on the basis of commeardts :glade at the meati:ig on Apt'i 17; V%e second : t I.is:on after review o� the staff analysis by the Chanhassen ViDage Cmr.cil and Plannim, Commission. The Referral Co.mrr:ltte.e has teen infcrned that the attached corr.meq,: are now acceptable to the Village. The attached re commcnda►l,)n_s were riot revie`- _.:i by the community but are hase(4 on the approved co nme :ts. After supmission of tide Chanhassen plan, contiguous municipa-Aties and affected independent agencies notified of its receipt a:zd given the opportunity to re,4u=-st a hearing, under the IXV> )visions of the Metropolitan Council Act- Eden Prz:irie dirt Y request a hearing on the basis of Its concern over tiie Tr•oposed Indu .trial use of .r.,:d south of Tli 5 in Baste; n �'t.an'.iasserr adjacent to ::Gen Prairie . Tt,e recli:ested l;ecr•~ ,:I was held by the P,e;emtl Cod mIllAee on Marc}. 6, 1.9 Si+. A sep.n-areport on this dispute, which the Ref --:�rra.l Co.m-mittee Is &Ar,imptir.(: -•_o mediate, was )z;-pared an,. been reviewed by b•_,`:h coriman, ins t)ut iN tetng h-mid pcnding :v.cejpi: of acdkional information. After discussior of the reviser stef,% analysis and sucgesLed rn ;crtnmf.ndtion, at 't= meeting an May '9, 1969, the Rceferral C ,)mmittee aJorted the te'lowir)g statement: METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227-9421 Referral Committee Recommendations on the Chanhassen Community Growth Guide Plan Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 1. Chanhassen should develop and adopt development policies and standards to guide development at the local level, supplementing recommended metropolitan policies and standards. 2. After completion of the Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendoff study of this section of the Metrop-titan Area, the Chanhassen thoroughfare plan should be re-examined in the light of the recommendations resulting from that study and with the objective of making the Chanhassen thoroughfare pattern more compatible with recommended standards contained in the Joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide. 3. Commercial use of the land below the river bluffs should be examined to eliminate from this use areas subject to flooding and to -assure that the commercial development permitted will have adequate highway access at times of high water. Chanhassen is urged to make use of the 1969 flood plain management legislation. 9. A study of utility services should be completed as soon as possible, especially since construction in the Southwest Service Area will make interceptor sewers available to the community in the near future and this will accelerate development requiring such utilities.. S. The proposed pattern of residential development should be examined with the objective of increasing the flexibility of development through more extensive use of planned unit development and other flexible controls. The use of some amenity sites for other than single-family housing should also be considered. /dms 6.3.69 La -3- The industrial areas as proposed do take advantage of highway facilities that provide cross directional movement and they are aligned with the proposed future transit routes as shown in the Metropolitan Development Guide. However, there is no identification of exclusive light and heavy industrial areas nor does the plan contain any development or performance standards. D. Utilities The matter of providing utility service to, Chanhassen is not discussed in this report. The provision of central water and sewer services is the key to development at urban densities and the rate at which these could be provided in Chanhassen and the location of the major interceptors and other facilities would dictate the rate and direction 'of urban growth. The Village indicates that a comprehensive sanitary sewer and water system study has been initiated. E. ; Housing While it may be only a bit of drafting license, neighborhood boundaries as shown on the plan e�clude the multiple -family areas, related commercial development, and planned unit development housing which should all be integrated into the neighborhoods. For the most part, multiple -family housing has been clustered around commercial centers, which is desirable to improve the vitality of the commercial development and to make it readily available to the residents of higher density areas. However, such multiple -family housing should not be used in a negative way to provide a "buffer" between single-family development and non-residential areas. More areas could be identified as potential sites for planned unit development to permit greater flexibility of development with a greater range of housing types and more innovative designs in each neighborhood. At the same time, there is some question about the use of planned unit development in the two rather small areas adjacent to the University Arboretum, since these may not be large enough for effective use of this type of development. No provision has been made for higher density development in any of the amenity sites such as lakefronts, river bluffs, high points, or other sites with special attractions, as recommended in the Metropolitan Development Guide, although there is some tie-in with the linear open space along the drainage ways. The Village has indicated that some of these problems will be overcome by the proposed zoning ordinance now being prepared. 0 _ F. Open Space and Natural Resources The plan identifies flood plains, drainage ways, various types of parks, and linear open space associated with natural patterns and linkages. A number of the open mace elements in the Chanhassen plan do have possible regional significance and the plan does provide for adequate access to these sites. There is no identification of historic sites and areas, native environments, steep slopes, wetlands, or such amenity elements l as skylines, views, and scenic areas or potential roadsides. i • Villagre ol Clianlia.4.4en P dFox 147 Chankaaaen, _ nnewa 55317 ZlIep�tone: 474_SO20 8885 May 7, 1969 a MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and Council Planning Commission Subject: Memorandum dated April 30 on Staff Analysis of Chanhassen Community Growth Guide Plan, Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 First paragraph. I have no quarrel with this though they are over the 60 day time limit as evaluation for the long range planning is the paragraph, even they state, full most important point. I. General Comments on Plan's Compatibility with Metropolitan Development Guide. The Chanhassen Guide Plan is only a Generalized Guide Plan and not a Comprehensive Plan. I feel the Council and Planning Commission are in general agreement with the Joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide. This paragraph is not so much against what we have done up to this point but to guide us in the future in forming our Comprehensive Plan. II. Comments on Specific Elements in the Plan. a. Transportation. I feel this is a true report and there is no basic conflict with our Guide Plan. b. Commercial Development. There is some need for concern that a portion of the commercial area in the general location of the Seminary does have possible flooding problems. C. Industrial Development. The location of an industrial site that the Metropolitan Council is pointing out does show on their Comprehensive Plan and also has been discussed by the Industrial Commission. As the report states, I do not feel there is a real conflict. d. Utilities. This will be covered in our Comprehensive Plan. The Village Engineer is submitting to HUD for planning assistance for a comprehensive study. e. Housing. Some of the answers to this section will be solved when our Planned Residential District under the proposed zoning ordinance is finished by the Planning Commission and given final approval by the Council. f. Open Space and Natural Resources. I discussed this paragraph with the staff of the Metropolitan Council on May 6. They are going to change this section considerably incorporating in their comments some of the ideas and principles that are in the Park Study. After considerable discussion the sentence that reads "The Chanhassen Open Space -Plan is not in conformance with the metropolitan open space plan" will not be in the new revised statement that the referral coordinator will be submitting to the referral committee. A mP=—e `,c iir-ram tee, erson is g s Me la.41elt ('rowing Su6urb .9n Z7/ce Southwest - 2 - Ou-f� � Y- Most of the questions or problems that arise from statements made are answered in the Park Study. This also fits into a comprehensive plan. In the Park Study, the f 1 ood plains, wetlands, etc. have been identified. The Planning Commission will also have as part of the proposed zoning ordinance a flood plain zoning which follows the desires of the Lo*er Minnesota Watershed District, .as z General Comments. I feel that the statements or comments that the referral committee has made are something that this Village can live with in the future considering the fact that sometime in the future we will be requesting approval on miscellaneous types of aid that the Council must approve. As their report reads, I feel there would be no direct conflict in which they would turn down a request that we may have in the future. We must have a letter into the Metropolitan Council by May 14 with our comments on the referral coordinator's reports in some form as I have submitted to you. Sincerely, Adolph Tessness Clerk -Administrator AT : j m Enc. Village of Clianhaijeh Box 147 Ckankaa.ien, Ainneaota 55317 Zelepkone: 474-,"20 8885 May 14, 1969 r MEMORANDUM To: Metropolitan Council Referral Committee From: Village of Chanhassen Subject: Staff Report on Chanhassen and Eden Prairie Controversy Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 The Village of Chanhassen is in general agreement with the statements made on the staff's reports dated April 16 and April 30. The Village of Chanhassen does realize the need for cooperation between two communities in abutting land use. Notification of any rezoning plans in the future will be given to any community on the boundaries of the Village where such rezoning may occur as far in advance as possible. In this way minor problems may be worked out before any final rezoning does occur. Items 3, 4, and 5 would not create an undue hardship on Chanhassen and would protect Eden Prairie. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the staff report prior to final action by the Referral Committee. AT:jm Sincerely, Adolph Tessness Clerk -Administrator Z7jie la.4teot Crowing Suburb Jn eke Soutltweit Village o f CltanAa.4jen Box 147 Clianhaaaen, .Winneaota 55317 Zeleplione: 474-519$9 8 8 8 5 May 14, 1969 J MEMORANDUM To: Metropolitan Council Referral Committee From: Village of Chanhassen Subject: Staff Analysis of Chanhassen Generalized Guide Plan - Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 Dated April 30, 1969 Revised The opening statements concerning the 60 day time limit is understood by the Village of Chanhassen and agree that full evaluation for long range planning is the most important point. I. General Comments on Plan's Compatibility with Metropolitan Development Guide The Chanhassen Guide Plan is only a Generalized Guide Plan and not a comprehensive plan. The Village is in general agreement with the Joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide and the basic idea of the Metropolitan Council's duty to coordinate the growth of the Metropolitan Area. We feel thi's paragraph is not so much against what we have done up to this point but to guide us in the future in forming our comprehensive plan. II. Comments on Specific Elements in the Plan A. Transportation The analysis on this section arrives at the same point as the Village, that until the final location of Highways 212-169-41-5 are decided, our guide plan in the area of transportation may require some changes. B. Commercial Development The area indicated in the last sentence of this section can best be qtnswered by stating that the Planning Commission will be incorporating in our complete new zoning ordinance a flood plain zoning, in compliap ce with the Lower Minnesota Watershed District. The restrictive, permissive, and warning area regulations and boundaries as indicated by the District will be the areas covered in our zoning ordinance. The Generalized Guide Plan does not show definite lines but only general lines. Zlte IaAfte.41 !growing Suburb Jit Z/te c5outhwest Metropolitan Council Referral Committee -2- May 14, 1969 C. Industrial Development A$ the report reads the Village does not feel there is aKy real conflict. D. Utilities This section will be covered in our comprehensive plan. The Village is starting on a comprehensive sanitary sewer and municipal water system study at this time. E. Housing Most of the answers to this section will be solved when our Planned Residential District in the proposed zoning ordinance is finished by the Planning Commission and given final approval by the Village Council. F. Open Space and Natural Resources I discussed this paragraph with the staff of the Metropolitan Council on May 6. They are going to change this section considerably incorporating in their comments some of the ideas and principles that are in the Park Study. After considerable discussion the sentence that reads "The Chanhassen Open Space Plan is not in conformance, with the Metropolitan Open Space Plan" will not be in the new revised statement that the referral coordinator will be submitting to the referral committee. Most of the questions or problems that arise from statements made are answered in the Park Study. This also fits into a comprehensive plan. In the Park Study, the flood plains, wetlands, etc. have been identified. The Planning Commission will also have as part of the proposed zoning ordinance a flood plain zoning which follows the desires of the Lower Minnesota Watershed District as mentioned before. The coordination of your staff with the municipality involved prior to submitting any report to the Referral Committee is a must. Only then will you be able to make a decision based on all the facts. Many times a written document can be misinterpreted and could lead to the Council's making a decision that they would not have made. This has been done since our first meeting with the Referral Committee. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the staff report prior to final action by the Referral Committee. Sincerely, Adolph Tessness Clerk -Administrator AT:jm Capitol Square Building, Cedar Street at 10th Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Area 612, 227-9421 May 2, 1969 Mr. Adolph Tessness Administrator Village of Chanhassen Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Mr. Tessness: Enclosed are twelve copies each of the revised version of the staff analysis of the Chanhassen plan, the staff report on the controversy regarding the use of land in Chanhassen along TH 5, and the April 30, 1969 supplement to the latter report. These are being sent to you at the request of the Referral Committee to permit review by your planning commission and/or village council prior to action by the Committee. If possible without a special meeting, it would be appreciated if your comments could be returned to me in sufficient time to permit consideration by the Referral Committee at its next meeting on May 15. Sincerely, *-4-4 0'141 $. Hugh C. Faville Referral Coordinator HCF: dms An Agency Created to Coordinate the Planning and Development of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Comprising: Anoka County 0 Carver County 0 Dakota County 0 Hennepin County o Ramsey County 0 Scott County 0 Washington County TA Suite 101 Capitol Squo.- ra,.s, Minnesota " 1 227-9421 MEETING OF THE REFERRAL COMMITTEE Thursday, May 1. 1969 Metropolitan Council Office 2.00 P. M. TENTATIVE AGENDA I. Roll Call and Apxoval of Agenda U. Business A. Hearing on the St. :,ouis Park Compreher.sive Community Plan (File 2W . B. Referrals for Committee Review i . Eden Prairie '. omprehensive Guide Flan (File .193) . 2. Chanhassen Community Growtn Guide. Plan (F1e 2: S; 3. St:pp►err:entary c*rtff genx.rt cn Chanhassen anti Eder: Prairie differences recta clinks use of :and la eastern section of Chanhassen alo S. 4. Highway Referrals: I-94 from Plum Avenue to W ite Bear Avenue, Saint Paul (file ; b. TH 66 from 91st Avenue NE in Blaine to CSAH 16 In Ham 2.ake (File 296) . C. Referrals in Process D. Other Ad oeurnment /dms 5 1 69 -Mil SGfmro Swldim , Suitt F1-ul; Minnadota 55101 22J-949"1 i FROM: Hugh C. r ,d I. , itdw al Coordinator c UNINCT: x 1 • a as of May 1, 1969 FLe Nt+ E91— &'Qef�9- a ha- 1.92 &, /6 c D 1 Inver Grove Heights 9 6/a/6 F. D I Edon Pmirl-s ' o 9R 2 E 5,7 lditm. ►, Dept. 110 1�'10: 3 v i s/SAS 3 bi 55 ! 7 vsdnaie 1FW9hts � 6 �' i �'% ° '' S • y M+.� . Hwy . Dspt. s164 i 2 Wiun. fiwy. Dept. .61 ? a Minn. IRwy. Dept • 3,11 . Hwy. Dept. 75 D 1 Ch nhawsen L 7 , d / .. ti, a $ 4 Minn. Hwy. rapt. 2 5 St. Lane mask '99 3/7.S%►:9 2 1 Lakeville May 1. 2 969 C-c 1ap,ehow vc Y'l�rs Gc-mprehgtLtf�'c!'?on TH 100 , 11duey Vi+ 0W Tt t� to 1-494 1-:)SE - 1-35 1-33E - Cedar b. Tit 100 - VtUsy Vivw Road W WU*m. TH 9 - StSn2an to Ccunty Road C Gnmprehertaive 1-94 - C3+'11d 10 Intero2sengs in MMus Grove Goof pirehms S'-mv Pion Comprehensive Fla n 292 •{I ?./67 F 4 Mien. HWI,., Dept. ► Steil AE -111f. Hoc . iso ;,-vCq it :j C change U-3 4/3/69 l E lZ Minn. Hunt. Dept. 1-94, Wen of vl!l �a hear Avenue b9S 4/ 1/y. 7, E nt : rll f , TE 61 to NICY-10 .. w�6 4/r 3r „+!„ 1 M!itT1c d7{yV, �7e3 � TIC .`$S, 91sT AvitJ2i:e t1 CSIN 1 E .118 4/1C/6e' 2 B U. Avit..& Park mgU:AaItjCr VIII169 2 .4 COC;,I Gr.. '. et Cc-v.prehensive P!-r. t e 78 R4 4,/?6/ iC ;'. B AcgW.s:tic"r, Rw h?r,*C ti1J11"ilYiftts nd m 2 ..ng analyzed by Planw..c, ::tiff f Re —referred to suf: fcc fu- or e:-e1Y14f �A Scheduled for jffp 12Lma cale iglaur $.1..69 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227-9421 MEMORANDUM April 30, 1969 Revi s ed TO: Referral Committee FROM: Hugh C. Faville, Referral Coordinator SUBJECT: Staff Analysis of Chanhassen Community Growth Guide Plan Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 The following comments are based on the review of the Chanhassen Community Growth Guide Plan by the Planning Department. While the Council has had this plan a couple weeks over the 60-day limit, it is desirable that comments and recommendations be submitted to the community for its consideration in the evaluation of long-range development proposals. It also affords an opportunity to suggest to the community additional studies of subjects not covered by the Guide Plan or in-depth studies of subjects which are only covered lightly in the Plan. I. General Comments on Plan's Compatibility with Metropolitan Development Guide In general, the Chanhassen. Plan does not specify short-range and long-range; development goals, the latter of which might be compared with those contained in the Joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide. Nor are development policies and standards stated in a way which would permit direct comparison with policies and standards contained in the Development Guide, with some exceptions. Where these policies and standards are identified there are some conflicts with those developed at the metropolitan level, as identified below. II. Comments on Specific Elements in the Plan A. Transportation As shown on the Guide Plan map, the existing and proposed highway routes may not be completely compatible with the plan's land use proposals if both 5 and 41 are developed as freeways which do not provide land access. If this is the case, the large commercial center as shown in the northeast quadrant of the cloverleaf inter- change of these highways will be difficult to serve because it is not directly adjacent to the closest thoroughfare which does provide land access. This problem would be overcome if either 5 or 41 are developed as expressways or lower level facilities which do provide limited land access, or if the commercial center is enlarged so that it directly abuts the road curving around northeast of the site. -2 - Development Guide standards call for a distance of four to six miles between paralleling metropolitan routes (freeways and expressways) in suburban areas. While "primary" highways are identified on the Chanhassen plan, and shown as at least four lane divided highways with the symbolism used, it is riot always clear whether they fall within the category of expressways and freeways or are lower level facilities. Because of the interchanges shown on the plan, bath TH 5 and the proposed U.S. 212 are assumed to be freeways which would be closer than four miles. However, it is recognized that these two routes, six miles apart west of Chaska, are forced by the Minnesota River to draw closer together in Chanhassen prior to their convergence in Eden Prairie. Based on the location of interchanges, it appears that only TH 41 would be considered a north -south freeway. If the other north -south primary routes are expressways, the spacing between them would not be in conformance with Development Guide standards; if they are lower level facilities, there would be no conflict with the standards. Guide standards do call for limiting access to freeways so that interchanges will occur only every two to three miles in suburban areas, rather than the more common one mile spacing shown on TH 5 and U.S. 212. The results of the Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendoff study of highways in this section of the Metropolitan Area may necessitate some rethinking of the Chanhassen thoroughfare plan. B. Commercial Development The identified commercial areas in the Chanhassen plan are located where it does not appear they will create any land use conflicts, and they are adequately integrated with proposed and existing transportation networks with the exception noted above, All of the proposed commercial centers are located on major cross town routes. One concern is the possibility that a portion of the general commercial area, south of the bluffs along the Minnesota River may be subject to flooding or have its access cut off if there is extensive flooding. C. Industrial Development The Chanhassen plan does provide for a reasonable total amount of industrial land although some of the areas identified are below the 200 acre minimum recommended in the joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide. The shallow industrial areas adjacent to the railroad in the eastern portion of the village appear somewhat questionable, except insofar as they provide for existing industry. The location of the major industrial area shown on the Chanhassen plan is in general agreement with the major industrial site shown on the joint Program Constellation Cities scheme, although slightly farther west. The possibility of consolidating industrial development into an area south of TH 5 between the two major north -south highways should be considered. This site would also have rail access. It is recognized that the industrial areas as shown on the Chanhassen plan might be served earlier by sewers than a site farther east, that soil conditions might make the westerly site more desirable, and that the relationship with adjoining industrial development in Chaska may be a factor in favor of the westerly site. _ J_ The industrial areas as proposed do take advantage of highway facilities that provide cross directional movement and they are aligned.with the proposed future transit routes as shown in the Metropolitan Development Guide. However, there is no identification of exclusive light and heavy industrial eireas nor does the plan contain any development or performance standards. D. Utilities The matter of providing utility service to Chanhassen is not discussed in this report. The provision of central water and sewer services is the key to development at urban densities and the rate at which these could be provided in Chanhassen and the: location of the major interceptors and other facilities would dictate the rate and direction of urban growth. E. Housing While it may be only a bit of drafting license, neighborhood boundaries as shown on the plan exclude the multiple family areas, related commercial development, and planned unit development housing which should all be integrated into the neighborhoods. For the most part, multiple -family housing has been clustered around commercial centers, which is desirable to improve the vitality of the commercial development and to make it readily available to the residents of higher density areas. However, such multiple -family housing should not be used in a negative way to provide a "buffer" between single-family development and non-residential areas. More areas could be identified as potential sites for planned unit development to permit greater flexibility of development with a greater range of housing types and more innovative designs in each neighborhood. At the same time, there is some question about the use of planned unit development in the two rather small areas adjacent to the University Arboretum, since these may not be large enough for effective use of this type of development. No provision has been made for higher density development in any of the amenity sites such as lakefronts, river bluffs, high points, or other sites with special attractions, as recommended in the _Metropolitan Development Guide, although there is some tie-in with the linear open space along the drainage ways. F. Open Space and Natural Resources The plan identifies flood plains, drainage ways, various types of parks, and linear open space associated with natural patterns and linkages. However, there is no identification of historic sites and areas, native environments, steep slopes, wetlands, or such amenity elements as skylines, views, and scenic areas or potential roadsides. A number of the open space elements in the Chanhassen plan do have possible regional significance and the plan does provide for adequate access to these sites. To the extent that steep slopes, flood plains, and wetlands have not been identified in the plan, the Chanhassen open space plan is not in conformance with the metropolitan open space plan. Of special concern is the fact that the river bluffs have not been identified nor have the proposed uses of the Minnesota River flood plain. Since review of the Chanhassen Community Growth Plan, the Metropolitan Council has received a copy of the Chanhassen Park Study, which appears to fill in some of the gaps in the open space portion of the Guide Plan. However, this Park Study was not submitted for formal review by the Council and has not been analyzed by the Planning Department staff.. V i lag oI Cltarzlta...4eh Box W Ckanlxaaaen, Ainneaoia J5317 ?>e%p1tone: 474-5020 8885 May 7, 1969 t MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and Council Planning Commission Subject: Supplement to Staff 'Report on Chanhassen and Eden Prairie Controversy Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275, dated April 30, 1969. I feel that the Village and/or the owner of the property Ken Beiersdorf, will have no problem following the Metropolitan Council's recommendations. AT:jm Sincerely, Adolph Tessness Clerk -Administrator Ulte IaReat %owing Suburb A Zl a Southwest METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota - 5 5101 227-9421 MEMORANDUM April 30, 1969 TO: Referral Committee FROM: Hugh C. Faville, Referral Coordinator SUBJECT: Supplement to Staff Report on Chanhassen and Eden Prairie Controversy Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 Additions to development restrictions: At its April 17th meeting, the Referral Committee voted to add the following two restrictions to those shown on page 3 of the April 16th staff report on this matter: 4. Outside storage should be prohibited in the industrial district. 5. The developers of this area should set aside the land required for that portion of the proposed parkway which would be located in Chanhassen. Plans for upgrading of TH 5: The Referral Committee also asked the staff to check with the Minnesota Highway Department on the status of plans for upgrading of TH 5.adjacent to this industrial site, since major changes in the alignment of this highway might affect the feasibility of development as proposed. These plans were checked through both a phone conversation with Norm Osterby of the District 5 office in Golden Valley, and a visit to that office to view the latest plans. The MHD's published Highway Construction Programs, 1969-1973, received by the Council in March 1969, includes a one -roadway grading and surfacing project on 7.5 miles of TH 5 from TH 41 in Chanhassen east to Mitchell Road in Eden Prairie. This project is scheduled for letting in the third quarter of 1972, and the estimated cost is $1 , 450, 000. The subject section of TH 5 would be within this stretch of highway. However, at the present time work on actual plans for upgrading of TH 5 have been held up pending receipt of the Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendoff study of this portion of the Metropolitan Area, and the findings regarding the future role of TH 5. The most recent plans are for a divided highway with expressway characteristics, including limitation of access. Adjacent to the industrial site in question the existing TH 5 would be utilized as a frontage road on the north side of the new highway, with '� - 2 - r'%, the right--of--way extending about 300 feet south of the centerline of the "present TH 5, leaving a parcel of land with a depth of approximately 1000 feet. There would be a grade level intersection at the northeast corner of the industrial site , at the point where the proposed parkway would cross TH S. There would be no direct access to the new TH 5 from the industrial site, such access would have to be via the parkway and a frontage road directly south of the TH 5 right- of -way or another road off the parkway some distance from TH 5. Land required for a frontage road would further reduce the depth of the site. It should be emphasized that these are not final plans; other ideas for this stretch of highway have been explored and possibly might be returned to. However, the important point seems to be that the basic proposal is to upgrade the highway in its present corridor rather than move it to a new alignment which might require more extensive rethinking of this industrial district proposal. HCF:dms 4.30.69 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227-9421 MEMORANDUM April 17, 1969 TO: Referral Committee FROM:. Hugh C. Faville, Referral Coordinator SUBJECT: Referrals in Process as of April 17 r. 1969 File Date No. Received Type District Applicant Subject 1921 8/8/68 D 1 Inver Grove Heights Comprehensive Plan 1931 8/8/68 D 6 Eden Prairie Comprehensive Plan 2071 9/30/68 E 6,7 Minn. Hwy. Dept. TH 100, Valley View Rd to I-49 2101, 2 10/10/68 E 9,10 Minn. Hwy. Dept. I-94 ( Part) 2411,2 11/5/68 D 3 Minneapolis Water Works Expansion 2551 12/13/68 D 2 Vadnais Heights Comprehensive Plan 2631 `2 1/20/69 E 1 Minn. Hwy. Dept. I-35E - I-35 to Cedar 2641 1/20/69 E 1 Minn. Hwy. Dept. I-35E - Cedar to TH 110 2651 1/21/69 E 6,7 Minn. Hwy. Dept. TH 100 - Valley View Rd to 2721,2 1/23/69 2751 1/30/69 2771 2/14/69 F5 D E 278 2/24/69 C 279 2/28/69 C 286 3/24/69 D Wilson 3,11 Minn. Hwy. Dept. TH 8 - Stinson to Co. Rd. C 1 Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan 4 Minn. Hwy. Dept. I-94 - CSAH 10 Interchange in Maple Grove 4 Met. Airports Comm. Ham Lake Airport Site 4-11 Hennepin County 1969-1973 Comprehensive Plan Park Reserve District 5 St. Louis Park Comprehensive Plan I Sixty-day limit expired. Holding for various reasons. -2- File Date No. Received Type District Applicant 288 3/25/69 D I Lakeville 290 3/27/69 A 3 Shoreview 292 4/l/69 E 4 Minn. Hwy. Dept. 293 4/3/69 E 12 Minn. Hwy. Dept. 295 4/11/69 E 2 Minn. Hwy. Dept. 296 4/11/69 E 3,4 Minn. Hwy. Dept. 297 4/15/69 E 4 Minn. Hwy. Dept. 298 4/16/69 B 1 Burnsville HCF:dms 4.17.69 Subject Comprehensive Plan Trunk Sewer System I-94, CSAH 18 and Boone Avenue Interchange I-94, West of White Bear Ave. TH 36, TH 61 to McKnight TH 65, 91 st Ave to CSAH 16 TH 55, Rockford to I-494 Park Acquisition LA METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227-9421 MEMORANDUM April 16, 1969 TO: Referral Committee FROM: Hugh C. Faville, Referral Coordinator SUBJECT: Staff Report on Chanhassen and Eden Prairie Differences Regarding Use of Land along TH 5 in Eastern Section of Chanhassen Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 This report presents the Referral staff view on the controversy between Chanhassen and Eden Prairie regarding the use of the approximately 140 acres of Chanhassen which projects into Eden Prairie, straddling TH.5, as shown on the attached map. The hearing on the Chanhassen plan, with special attention given to this matter, was held by the Referral Committee on March 6, 1969. It was attended by George Hite, Village Manager of Eden Prairie; Adolr�hTessness, Village Administrator of Chanhassen; and Mr. Hilbert Hill, Chanhassen Councilman. The hearing served to pinpoint the nature of the controversy, although there was no resolution of the differences at the March 6 hearing. As the Council Act states, "the council may attempt to mediate and resolve differences of opinion which exist among the participants in the hearing with respect to the plan submitted. " The Council is given no power to impose a solution in the case of a controversy such as this. This controversy can be attributed in part to the fact that both Chanhassen and Eden Prairie have undergone a great change within the past few years and have suffered growing pains due to rapid population growth, expansion of territory, changes in the form of government, and increased recognition of the need for improved handling of development problems. When the consolidation of the old Village of Chanhassen and a portion of the old Town of Chanhassen took place, the village had to use the township ordinances which were quite inadequate for the purpose of properly controlling land development in an urbanizing area. At the same time, Eden Prairie was using, and still is, an earlier zoning ordinance which provides extensive industrial zoning in the western part of the village. The Eden Prairie case was presented by George Hite at the meeting on March 6. A copy of his presentation is attached to this report. Eden Prairie's principal concern, is the impact of industrial development on the land south of TH 5 upon Eden Prairie's proposal to rezone extensive areas from industrial to residential use in conformance with its comprehensive guide plan. Industrial use of the land north of TH 5 is not being questioned by Eden Prairie. At th.e hearing the point was made that this tract of land south of TH 5 is designated on the Chanhassen plan as "residential planned unit development." This would be compatible with Eden Prairie's proposal for residential use on its adjacent land. However, Chanhassen is proceeding with a combination of industrial, commercial, and residential uses of the land. Chanhassen representatives stated that the Chanhassen Guide Plan map was in error to the extent that the tract in question was intended to be zoned to permit a planned industrial district, rather than just a residential planned unit development. The current development proposal calls for residential use of the western third of this tract, commercial use of the center third, and planned industrial district use of the eastern third. The area north of TH 5 would also be developed as a planned industrial district. Since the hearing on March 6, Mr. Adolph Tessness has supplied the Council with a copy of the Chanhassen "Planned Industrial District Ordinance," adopted April 15, 1968. This ordinance, 19 pages in length, sets out the objectives and criteria for development of planned industrial districts, and specifies the design and performance standards which must be met in the development of such a district. These are high standards and they have been developed with the objective of making the industrial development in such a district as compatible as possible with nearby residential uses. For example, the ordinance states that "where the district abuts or adjoins a residential district, across the street there shall be a building set back on that street of not less than 75 feet. " In addition "where the district abuts or adjoins a residential district aside a rear yard abutting such residential district shall be not less than 100 feet. " Mandatory landscaping, sign controls, and fencing requirements are among the other ordinance provisions intended to insure high quality industrial development. If the question of the use of the tract of land in Chanhassen south of TH 5 was still wide open, we would concur with Eden Prairie that residential use of this land would be preferable from the standpoint of its relationship with the Eden Prairie proposal for residential use of the adjacent land. However, if the zoning for a planned industrial district has occurred, and private commitments made on the basis of such zoning, then the problem resolves itself into one of making such development as compatible as possible with the Eden Prairie proposals for use of the adjoining land. Chanhassen may have been well justified in zoning for a small high -quality industrial development adjacent to the extensive industrially -zoned areas in Eden Prairie. In fact, the planned industrial district would provide a transition between the Eden Prairie industrial areas and commercial and residential areas in Chanhassen. But at the same time we endorse Eden Prairie's proposal to eliminate the large industrially -zoned areas which are well beyond the needs for this portion of the Metropolitan Area, and not properly related to transportation facilities and other land uses as shown on the Eden Prairie plan. George Hite pointed out the desirability of having "Logical boundaries for the industrial development in Chanhassen. Eden Prairie does not object to the industrial use of the land north of TH 5 which would be bordered on the north by the railroad and on the east by the parkway proposed in the Eden Prairie plan, providing, it is felt, a sufficient barrier to justify residential zoning of the land across the railroad and the parkway. The same parkway would provide a logical boundary between the Chanhassen planned industrial district and Eden Prairie residential uses south of TH S to the east of the parkway. However, there would be no similar barrier between the industrial district and land to the south of it in Eden Prairie. If this is considered a major problem, then consideration might be given to a similar use in Eden Prairie, extending southward along the west side of the parkway to a'logical termination point north of Rice Marsh Lake, fixed by topography. -3-- However, the staff considers the above alternative less desirable than the limiting of the industrial development south of TH 5 to that presently proposed by Chanhassen. We believe that the high development and performance standards called for in the controlling ordinance will permit proper residential development of the adjoining land to the south in Eden Prairie if Chanhassen imposes the following restrictions in the development of this property: 1. Land in Eden Prairie to the east across the proposed parkway and south of the industrial site should be considered as residential districts in the application of the yard, set back, and other requirements contained in the planned industrial district ordinance. (Such ordinances are frequently quite unclear regarding the application of such restrictions where the adjoining land is located in another municipality. This also advocates basing the requirements on the Eden Prairie Guide Plan and proposed zoning, rather than the existing zoning.) 2. All highway access to the industrial district, and adjoining commercial area, should be from TH 5, with no access provided from the proposed parkway along the eastern boundary of the industrial area. This access will have to be from a: frontage road if TH 5 is developed as a freeway as shown in the Chanhassen Guide Plan. 3. Any variances from the literal provisions of the planned industrial district .ordinance should be discussed in advance with Eden Prairie officials. For its part, Eden Prairie should require residential plats south of -the commercial and industrial areas to have lots backing to the non-residential uses, with adequate depth to permit the provision of additional screening on these lots, if desired. HCF:dms 4.16.69 Y i C a'I'UT2 TO ME IMMPOLITAW OOtT14CIL MFERRAL CCUUTTEE CAI THE CHAiM,SSErl GUNUtALMD GUIDE PLAN BY G DORM C. HITE, E EN PRAIRII: VILLAGE TiNjA=Z The Village of Eden Prairie is pleased to have this :opportunity to express it's views on those elerronts of the alantlassen ,Cammnity Growth Guide Plan" that have same inpact on tiie Eden Prairie canprehensive Guide Plan and especially on our ability to irrPlenent that plan. we understand that Eden Prairie is ;he first ccrl mtnity to ask for a hearing on a neighboring u~iity carprj,he_nsive plan. Our uiZ1 acticn is not a . product of a dispute with our neighbors in Crianhassear but instead,, reflects the degree of i_goortance we assign to Community plannin and tee uedi.caticn we have to the task of plan Uple pntati en. T sense that Char-tiassen shares our attitude on these matters and equally welcams this opportunity to express it's via -Is. ,Tie Eden Prairie CaTrehensive Guide Plan was adopted by tine Village Council in July, 1968 after many months of extensive review and discussion. 7tle Preparation of the plan was accanplished without the assistance of State or Federal funds because of our desire to incorporate sane procedures and ideas foreign to Lhe "standard'` p?.E`_nn T19 programs. Tile process of preparing the plan was characterized by a s,ictant;al degree of citizen participation and the inclusion of somL� tl-*..sc. - i inot nonr--My associated with suburban planning. Mie adopted plan is now in the process of being ir_plemited in I variety of ways including the preparation of utility system plans; the adoption of a new zoning ordinance; tie acquisition of all major park areas; and, tine establishment of a municipal organization capable of responding to the needs of a rapidly growing cmumaty. We are also currently engaged in the very difficult task of -adjusting a zoning pattern developed in an era when it was considered advisable to strip zone all lands adjacent to hi.gl-&rays and railroads for industrial or eamiercial purposes. rThe 1968 Eden Prairie C'rnprehensive Guide Plan life most contemporary plans is not based upon those principals. As a result, a large amount of undeveloped acreage currently zoned for industrial or c&#ercial purposes needs to be re --appraised because of a conflict with the lard use section of the VilJ_aga's Corprelkaisive Plan. This is one of the Ubst difficult of the many plan irplenentation stages. It is in this dontext that are feel we mast con, nent on certain proposals in the Chanhassen "Cmi mity Growth Plan". The Eden Prairie Plan proposes that most of the lands currently zoned industrial along the two railroads and Highway 5 in the area west of County Road #4 be instead developed residentially. Sore of these properties are adjacent to Chanhassen. There are a great nurii)er of reasons for these land use classification changes, chief among then being the desire to consolidate major industrial and camercial uses in areas adequately served by highway and rail facilities; to reserve lands possessing good environmental qualities for residential purposes; and, to adequately -inter -relate ti,ese uses so tat the legitimate interests of both are properly protected. Indeed, these same principals ere set forth on pages 2 and 3 of the Chanhassen Plan text. 0 The Chanbassen Plan appears to carpleraent the Eden.Prairie proposals. With the exception of properties along State highway #5, all lands adjacent to the proposed Eden Prairie residential areas are likewise classified as (2) residential. The highway 105 properties, ha-iever, which are locatea in a trapizoidal shaped area of about 140 acres projecting easterly into the Eden Prairie area are classified "Industrial" nortlk of Iliglyuay #F5, and "Planned Unit Development" south of Eighway 95. The "Planned Unit Development" area would seen to be a ccirpatible use since the Guiae Plan legend classifies this as a "residential" use. However, action taken by the Chanhassen Council and Plaruihzg Cam-issi.on since the preparation of - the Guide Plan zoning these lands for multiple family, industrial and conmmrcial uses would suggest that the legend is incorrect. At the time of the rezoning (Dec. 1968), Eden Prairie responded to the hearing notice and asked that the proposed rezonings oe reconsidered because of the. serious impact we felt they would have on our ability to implement our mai plan. We presented the following reasons to justify our proposal to change the existing nearby Eden Prairie industrial zoning to residential: 1. Adequate, logical., better serviced industrial park areas in other parts of the Village. 2. Complete absence of natural barriers or divisions in the area between T.ii. 5 and the railroad to the south. If industrial development began any7here in this area, there is singly no logical point at v.hich to change land uses. 3. Existing, quality single family dwellings (Chanhassen Estates) iraredi ately viest of the Village boundary indicate a willingness to de%7elop anu a market to satisfy for single family dwellings in this area. 4. Ilost of -lie area is rolling, wooded, and dotted with small lakes, making -"_t highly desirable for low density residential development. 5. Eden Prairie can not na,7 nor in the near.future serve the area Frith sanitary sewar or water systems adequate for non-residential uses. 6. T.H. 5 when improved to an expressway design with extensive rights -of way .,rill serve as an adequate transitional device beti;-een the. Chanhassen industrial area to the north and the residential area to the south. (3) Tile Chanhassen Council very patiently listened to our plea and we are ^' certain that they gave it careful consideration. Although they rezoned the properties in. the. manner initially proposed, they assured Eden Prairie that they would do all that they could to assure that the actual development of the multiple family, industrial and ccMexcial sites would give adequate accord to the nearby Eden Prairie residential areas. tide, nevertheless, feel that the development of these lands for these purposes would seriously impair our ability to implement our am Comprehensive Plan proposals. 7lie Chanhassen industrial and commercial land use along Highway #5 would, in our opinion, be a direct contradiction of not only the Wen Prairie Plan objectives, but those of the Chan'riassen Plan as well. The role of the i1btropolitan Council in matters such as this is lhni.ted to that of adding it's comment and recommendations on the plan proposals Lefore it. We see}: no more than fiat. Zoe feel that it is the responsibility of the uo«astunities involved to reconcile their respective comprehensive plans and, there is no reason to believe Ciat This wdll not be done In this instance. Nevertheless, tine recmw-ndations of the Council will be highly regarded by both parties and may well serve as a, basis for such a reconciliation. Thank you: (4) 4 i t Uj 22. • ✓ i C3 6 Im - iC3� 4 tfl. o �4�in - i © — 7 a n jjy Ai !t� C t 19 r♦, EA -�yg �jr,3�v f>�,.1.] Y1LJiJ...tyJ 4L 40 ZIo:3no3L1�L�; 41 Ls D El El IL 13 O €l 1-'rnil`7�i3i'I"1 �'7Q'7 •�t� _�� � � � .A�•�LS.3 ts MQ•7fl7[lcii3QL7 -LIE i. 7 Ll Ei --f ,! Li a -! f3 ❑ J. r� fJ 4 L7 L •` � ,.t 'ice CL Mv.. TessN�ess( A-7-TACV41EV> A- 7cr.,to Co P I E s C) T l-1 C- to PR k L. l 5 5-c izr-i= A n nat.Y S t S Ac_o� 4� W VTk 10T E S u 5q lESTEp �E�1�S�o�vS 0vr PAi2&g=iRAPNS A qNb ( . TL-1c- Oo pi r- i k -T Te e t.J1L(- �C- Co 4� ,Th1tS �tATT� r1 C, At w AT yr S Ms --r- t ?-A l 1 A'"{ l S T U l) o Q L. D Ar P IZE, `too u 2 C-ci M f-1 a r.4- -S o o,. T" le Sie Sty %) 0 1•1 N �l �- V 'C �"4 C�T� O f= O v m S _rAvr f= WtL(.. WU STnPP1a�..� g`r "Ie2-fs luFSDta`e �-°to 2r•� t ►.� elm "To O k S C u S S -r N 1 S W 1T N **,iou tv= *rou KAve WAv A �6,1AuG� W ( L t. CO "�roCi M kj'IE �`Tu 1E, s Q 4-e 0 s o ra,�t s • • A. Transportation As shown on the Guide Plan map, the existing and proposed highway routes may not be completely compatible with the plan's land use proposals if both 5 and 41 are developed as freeways which do not provide land access. If this is the case, the large commercial center as shown in the northeast quadrant of the cloverleaf inter- change of these highways will be difficult to serve because it is not directly adjacent to the closest thoroughfare which does provide land access. This problem would be overcome if either 5 or 41 are developed as expressways or lower level facilities which do provide limited land access, or if the commercial center is enlarged so that it directly abuts the road curving around northeast of the site. Route spacing of freeways and expressways shown in the Chanhassen plan is not in conformance with the Development Guide standards, which call for a distance of four to six miles between paralleling metropolitan routes (freeways and expressways) in suburban areas. As shown, TH 5 and the proposed U.S. 212 are closer than that, although it is our understanding that this spacing is the result of a county, not a community, recommendation. Nor are the north -south freeways and expressways spaced in conformance with this standard. in addition, Guide standards call for limiting access to freeways so that interchanges will occur only every two to three miles, compared with the more common one mile spacing shown on the Chanhassen plan. The results of Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendoff study of highways in this section of the Metropolitan Area may necessitate some rethinking of the Chanhassen thoroughfare plan. C. Industrial Development The Chanhassen plan does provide for a reasonable total amount of industrial land although some of the areas identified are below the 200 acre minimum recommended in the joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide. The shallow industrial areas adjacent to the railroad in the eastern portion of the village appear somewhat questionable, except insofar as they provide for existing industry. The location of the major industrial area shown on the Chanhassen plan is in general agreement with the major industrial site shown on the Joint Program Constellation Cities scheme, although slightly farther west. The possibility of consolidating industrial development into an area south of TH 5 between the two major north --south highways should be considered. This site would also have rail access. It is recognized that the industrial areas as shown on the Chanhassen plan might be served earlier by sewers than a site farther east, that soil conditions might make the westerly site more desirable, and that the relationship with adjoining industrial development in Chaska may be a factor in favor of the westerly site. The industrial areas as proposed do take advantage of highway facilities that provide cross directional movement and they are aligned with the proposed future transit routes as shown in the Metropolitan Development Guide. However, there is no identification of exclusive light and heavy industrial areas nor does the plan contain any development or performance standards. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square ;Building, Saint Pawl, Minnesota 55101 227-9421 MEMORANDUM April 15, 1969 TO: Referral Committee FROM: Hugh C. Faville, Referral Coordinator SUBJECT: Staff Analysis of Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 193 The following comments are the results of a rather detailed analysis of this plan by the Planning Department. Actually, the Eden Prairie plan was reviewed twice, the second time to test a check list developed for use in the review of municipal comprehensive plans. As with most plans to date, we have had this one well over the 60-day limit specified in our law but, as in other cases, we feel these comments should be submitted to the community because they will be of value in their consideration of long-range development proposals. The Planning Department's comments and views are as follows: I. Compatibility Long-range goals as spelled out in the plan are generally compatible with both the municipal and Joint Program Metropolitan Development Guide long-range goals in transportation, commercial development, industrial development, utilities and open space. However, there are some distinct differences between the Eden Prairie and metropolitan goals and policies in the field of housing, which will be identified In a later section. Short-range goals, development policies, and recommended standards, the last two of which might be compared with recommended metropolitan policies and standards, are not specified in the plan. II. General .Quality of the Plan The plan adequately provides for the creation of a stable environment and exhibits a reasonable balance of proposed land uses, although the staff feels that there are some questions about the distribution of land uses, as discussed below. Ill. Comments on Specific Elements in the Plan A. Transportation Existing and proposed transportation routes are considered to be compatible with the plan's land use proposals and the ring road proposed around the interchange at I-494 and TH 169 does a fairly good job of serving the center which is to be developed in four quadrants of this interchange. While the Council staff has serious reservations about the desirability of commercial development in all quadrants, it has recommended a similar traffic solution in other cases where this occurs. The plan shows fairly good agreement with the Development Guide's route and access spacing standards, although there are more- interchanges than required by those standards. It is recognized that the Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendoff study, which covers -2- a good portion of Eden Prairie, may change some of the major highway proposals shown on this plan. B. Commercial Development The major feature of the Eden Prairie plan is the large diversified center proposec'. at the I-494 and TH 169 interchange. The location of this center is in agreement with the major centers pattern identified in the Metropolitan Development Guide and is compatible with the Guide's recommended future mass transit routes. The Cot.ncil staff is concerned about the fractionization of the proposed commercial development in all four quadrants of this interchange and while the plan for the center indicates much careful thought, the traffic impact and functional implications of this layout require more study. The proposed neighborhood convenience goods centers -relate well .to the areas to be served without potential land use o.)nflicts. The over-all quality of the sites reserved for these neighborhood centers is considered good.. C. Industrial Development There is staff concern over the number of small scattered industrial areas poposed although the total amount of land reserved for industrial use appears reasonable. However, many of the smaller areas are below the minimum 200 acre size recommended in the Metropolitan Development Guide. The largest of the proposed industrial areas are properly located to take advantage of highway facilities that provide cross -directional movement but some of the sites do not appear th exhibit the quality required to minimize land development costs. The spatial relationship between Industrial areas and other large employment centers is considered only fair although the plan provides for ready access from industrial areas to shopping and commercial areas. It is noted that the plan does not provide for exclusive light and heavy industrial areas. As with the major diversified center, the plan's major industrial areas are properly related to the Development Guide proposals for future mass transit routes. D. Housing_ The plan does provide for a range of housing densities, and the land designated for various densities is considered to be of good quality, realistically related to physiography and to neighborhood and community retail, educational, and institu- tional facilities. However, the indicated Eden Prairie goal of discouraging impulse, innovation and initiative in land use, development and building standards runs counter to the Metropolitan Development Guide Housing Policy, "Encourage design and planning innovations in both housing structures and land development". Other "Housing Goals" identified in the Metropalitan Development Guide which do not appear to he adequately reflected in the Eden Prairie plan include "A•broad choice of housing types , " "Dousing choice within neighborhoods," and "Identity and individuality in housing." R l The Metropolitan Development Guide recommends, "Locate most high -density housing near major activity concentrations while allowing other high -density housh to locate near natural amenities such as lakes, parks, and rivers." The Eden Prairie plan does a good job of relating higher density housing to activity centers, but the Council staff feels that there might be a closer relationship with the parks and lakes in the community. The recommended minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet per single family unit with sewers available is compatible with the Guide recommenda- tion to "restrict the average lot size in new single family plats outside of the low - density zones to no more than onethird acre," although the Eden Prairie plan does not suggest any maximum lot size where utilities are available. The Council staff is concerned about the fact that the plan does not permit the maximum degree of land development flexibility because of the explicit demarcation of residential density zones rather than the designation of more areas as planned unit development zones. E. Utilities The Eden Prairie plan report recommends an in-depth utility study for the community w!th which the Council staff concurs. Emphasis is placed on the need for sanitary and storm sewers with a ;riority system for development, and sewer proposals realistically related to proposed residential densities, major activity centers, and watersheds. It is noted that utilities are restricted from the flood plain as recommended in the Metropolitan Development Guide, although it is not clear whether they would be likewise restricted from the airport "clear zones." In general, the utility proposals are compatible with the "preliminary concept sewer plan" for the Metropolitan Area. F. Open Space and Natural Resources 1. Conseriation Elements. The game refuges and native environment areas specified in the Eden Prairie plan may have regional significance and there is adequate access provided to such sites. 2. Protection Elements. Steep slopes, flood plains, and drainage ways are identified in the plan, although there is no specific identification of wetlands or water recharge areas. While all four types of area may have regional significance, adequate access is provided only to the first two. Counci Staff believes that insufficient attention has been given to wetlands and in this respect the open space plan does not agree with the metropolitan open space plan. There is no specific planned use for the Minnesota River flood plain other than identification as quasi -public, nor is there any specific planned protection of the river bluffs, 3. Amenity- Elements, Because of the topography, scenic features, and natural resources of Eden Prairie, it is felt that the skyline views, scenic areas, and roadsides all have possible regional significance,, even as some of them do now, More attention could have been given to this in the plan because there is a greater potential for this than has. been identified, and in this sense the municipality's open space plan does not agree with the metropolitan open space plan. -4- 4. Parks. The plan does identify local ;arks, playfields, school/ park combinations, as well as regional parka. Those parks considered to have regional significance are provided with adequate access and rer'Iect the natural resource rage of the municipality and as such are compatible with the metropolitan open space. plan. S. Linear Open Space. The plan does identify where the circulation system might be associated with the natural patterns and where there are natural and functional linkages provided by open space. All of these may have possible regional significance, reflect the :natural resource base of the municipality and are in agreemer:t with the metropolitan open space plan. /d ms 4V15.969 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol_ Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227--9421 MEMORANDUIT VI April 10, 1969 TO: Referral Committee FROM: Hugh C. Faville, Referral Coordinator SUBJECT: Suggestdd Procedure for Certain Types of Highway Referrals On March 6, 1969, the Referral Committee asked the staff to develop modified proceduxes for the handling of highway referrals in cases where the Council staff disagrees with the plans submitted by the Minnesota Highway Department. No change is proposed in the procedure on proforma highway referrals or those of metropolitan concern in which the staff is in agreement with thesubmitted plans. In the controversial referrals it is proposed that certain key facts be identified and basic questions answered in the staff analysis of the plan and presented in. a report with a standard format (see attachment) . Depending upon the nature of the project, these facts. -would include: 1. Constraints and design features which limit solutions or alternatives. (For example, the proximity of the I-35E interchange to the U.S. 61 interchange or, I-694 interferes with the provision of some directional movements at U.S. 61 without creating weaving problems.) 2. Basic characteristics of the -thoroughfare system which` contributed to the creation of the controversy. (For example, the interchange of 1-35E and I-35W in Burnsville should not have been placed where it is if it was known that County Road 42 on its present alignment was going to be a major thoroughfare interchanging with one or both of these freeways.) 3. Status of the community (or county) plan, especially the thoroughfare plan, and its relationship to the proposed highway facility being considered. 4. Commitments already made on the basis of the submitted plan,, but limited to public actions, not private investment in land or buildings. 5. Alternatives studied by the Highway Department. 6. Corrections possible now, in the light of the basic characteristics'and other factors identified above At what point in the procedure does the Council staff undertake this type of detailed analysis? Referral policies have recently been amended to permit considerable _2_ contact between the Council staff, the applicant, and affected parties, including discussion of the staff's tentative conclusions, prior to initial consideration by the Referral Com.-nittee. It is proposed that when the staff finds that it disagrees with the submitted highway plan, the Referral Coordinator will consult the chairman of the Referral Committee and request permission for the- staff to work with the MHD and affected communities on alternatives prior to initial consideration of the referral by the Committee. The Council staff report to the Committee would present all viewpoints, including the metropolitan viewpoint as seen by the staff, and any alternatives which had been developed as a result of consultation with the other parties. If this procedure is to be implemented, the established procedures for federal grant applications should be modified by the addition of the following section: B2 On referrals concerned with highway projects, and others specified by the Referral Committee, and with the prior approval of the Chairman of the Committee, the staff may consult with the Minnesota Highway Department staff and affected communities and explore alternatives to the submitted plans. The written staff report should identify the alternatives, and the viewpoints of the various parties, including the Council staff analysis of the metropolitan interest and identification of the alternative most consistent with metropolitan planning completed and in proces s . B3 Formerly B2 B4 Formerly B3, etc. Implementation of this change does not require C_;uncil action; referral procedures were established by Chairman Hetland on November 21, 1967 and can be amended by him. Tlif aforementioned January 23, 1969 change in policy_ approved by the Council is broad enough to cover this procedural change. HCF:dms 4.9.69 SUGGESTED OUTLINE FOR STAFF REPORT T. Referral description with good sketch map, H. Staff .recommendation for Referral.Committec- action, with summary s-tatement of reasons. IIT,,. Background and analysis. A. Metropolitan view of referral as submitted. B. Background. 1 , Basic faults and phvsical colnstnaini:s. 2 Status of public commitments and related planning. 3. Positions of MHD, and affected communities and count_i.es , 4. Alternatives previously considered and rejected, with reason. C. Alternatives possible at this time, with analysis and recommendations. /dms 4.9,69 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227-9421 MEMORANDUM April 10, 1969 TO: Referral Committee FROM: John K. Rutford, Referral Assistant SUBJECT: Staff Analysis of Hennepin County Park Reserve District Plans, 1969-1973 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 279 The Metropolitan Council received,. on February 27, 1969, the Hennepin County Park Reserve District plan entitled, "A System of Parks for Hennepin Countv, 1969-1973. " This plan is dated December 1968, and was submitted for review as an independent agency plan. The Metropolitan Council law on the review of the plans of independent agencies reads in part as follows: "The metropolitan council shall review all long term comprehensive plans of each independent commission, board, or agency prepared for its operation and development within the metropolitan area but only if such plan is determined by the council to have an area -wide effect, a multi -community effect, or to, have a substantial effect on metropolitan development. Each plan shall be submitted to the council before any action is taken to place the plan or any part thereof, into effect." The plan submitted proposes to complete acquisition and begin substantial development of six park sites, all of which are identified in the Metropolitan Open Space System as existing metropolitan park sites. The plan submitted, therefore, does have an area -wide effect, multi -community effect, and L substantial effect on metropolitan area development and is therefore subject to the review of the Metropolitan Council. The plans submitted by the HCPRD involve expenditures of $5 , 418, 000 for development projects in the six park sites for the period of 1969-1973. The plan further identifies expenditures of $2 , 600, 000 for acquisition purposes. The development program proposes opening all park reserves in the next five years. While many planned developments are on a minimum scale, this program does open each park for recreation of a type which best suits the location. Acquisition of the park reserve property has been a continuing process. Since the 1956 gift of 210 acres in Baker Park, the district has spent $8,744,272 for 12,504 acres. In addition to the original bonding authority that produced $ 850 , 000 , and the $8,000,000 authorized by the 1963 state legislature, federal and state funds currently have added about $1 , 300 , 000 to the acquisition fund. Some 3,000 acres must be purchased to fill the gaps within the projected park boundaries that are not already owned by the reserve district, and negotiations involving about 1,900 of these acres are now in progress. These purchases would extend park property to logical boundaries such as roads, rivers, and highways that clearly separate public from private property. -2- Staff analysis indicates that the plan submitted by the Hennepin County Park Reserve District for the years 1969--1973 is consistent with metropolitan open space planning completed and in process. It is also considered a satisfactory plan forth,-- development of facilities by the county or park reserve district. However, this acquisition and development program might not be the most desirable as part of a total metropolitan program concerned with the provision of facilities throughout the Metropolitan Area. Therefore, it is felt that Council approval of this plan should be conditioned upon reservation of the right of any metropolitan park or open space board, if such is created, to review and modify the five-year program and to make changes, if necessary, to make it conform with the metropolitan open space plan and development program. 1 in UK CO ��4011 11, 7 Cna, A— V AU jl,�Y4F A 40,�SQ q ,T-*:; i e .1 _,, -,. -. E; 1 fy�507& 171 1 7/14/60 A 2 1932 USA c F) 6 200 2 s A 2 2 A A 3 20? VMS E sp 20 10hous 1] 9,10 Tys Y'- 243 11/5/60 )-j 3 2551.12/13/68 1D '? 263 3/20/69 F 1 261 1/10/69 B 1 265 1/21/09 E 0,7 210 1/17/69 E 6 2 A"M M4& inva Gunu HS Hu 1, qn, 00C. jy 6, 1 BY Soo_ y4nn Cc)o,t Roy ; Him. 1003 INY4 'OE! 10,0 V:; lvi'inn, T) ;,7y . I. , C; 4 Milloun Cinvi s�TC.:s Minn- F-Tv,-y io Ccd-T�-v- Mh�ri, f-35E - God&r to Tl'11.0 Minil. Ow EMPT TH ) 00 Va3ley Vi so M, to AM �u BAWn MY. IDept. TH 169 1-494 to CSATT SJ 20 1/2 KA3 v 3, 277 2/1410 Y 27S 2/2 4/& D Cl 2'/ `; 2/2 221 3/3A9 13- 1 A M MAC F 5 Y- 4q lit may. 1-24 Ivi Awn St. Ln� TVA PCIA h0quis! Ar--.-! METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 101 Capitol Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 227--9421 MEMOR NDT-TM March 5, 1969 TO: Referral Committee FROM: Hugh C. Faville, Referral Coordinator SUBJECT: Supplementary report on: TH 169-212 from I- 494 to CSAH 61 (Referral File 270) Interchange of 1-494 with New TH 169 and Old TH 1.69 (Referral File 273) On March 4, 1969, an interagency staff meeting was held to discuss the above highway referrals and their relationship to the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan. The following people were present at this meeting: Minnesota Highway Department: Charles Bur. -ill, Harvey Dart, Clem Kachelmyer, Norman Osterby, and Paul Velz Eden Prairie: George Hite, Village Manager Metropolitan Council: David Rubin and Hugh Faville As outlined in David Rubin's February 17, 1969 report on these referrals, it is the Council staff view that construction of ramps to old TH 169 from 1-494, and the design of the proposed interchange of new TH 169 with CSAH 60, would prevent implementation of the Eden Prairie plan to build a ring road around the new TH 1.69-- I-494 cloverleaf interchange to provide access to development in this area. This ring road concept is in agreement with Council staff thinking on service to development in several quadrants of a cloverleaf interchange, The Eden Prairie Village Council has by resolution requested the Minnesota Highway Department to delete from its May 1969 letting the proposed ramps from 1-494 to old TH 169,and has engaged the firm of Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendoff to conduct a study of the eastern section of the proposed ring road, from TH 169 south to a half -diamond interchange at I-494 which would be located easterly of the originally proposed half -diamond interchange at old TH 1690 The Council staff's concern with the proposed interchange at CSAH 60 and TH 169 was that the ring road proposal would require only a half diamond to the northeast of 60, whereas the current MHD proposal for the upgrading of TI-1 169 has a folded diamond at this intersection, providing for all directional movements. Provision of only a ® half diamond in this location is predicated on the assumption that the complete ring road would be constructed, eI.iminating the need for movements to and from the west at CSAH 60 since these movements would be accommodated at another half diamond on the western portion of the ring road. While in general agreement with the ring road concept, the MHD pn r. sonnel pointed out that there was no assurance that the western ring road and half --diamond would be constructed, that even if it was it n might be some years before it was constructed, and that: there would be a need in the immediate future for taking care of all directional movements from the land development. around the eastern part of the ring road. Future completion of the ring road and other interchanges might permit subsequent modification of the CSAH 60.• TH 169 interchange. After thorough discussion of the design of highways in this section of Eden Prairie, the participants all. agreed on the following points; 1 . The cloverleaf interchange at 1 -494 and new TH 169`212 should be completed through addition of the two missing ramps (State Project 2785-126). 2. The two ramps from I-v494 to old TH 169 (State Project 2785P-131) should not be constructed at this time, in view of Eden Prairie's impending study of the feasibility of the eastern ring road with a half -diamond interchange located farther. east on 1-494. 3. The new TH 169-212 should be constructed according to the submitted plans (State Project 2763--08) from I-494 to CSAH 61, but the westbound "on" and eastbound "off" ramps at CSAH 60 should be built with the understanding that they may be adjusted later to suit future development in the area. /dms 3.5.69 G) W r � UJINWAY NEFERTAL QIEV \M /» Legend: i 2 3 rofer t0 0 i esporling paragraph.r 2t=2a in A. Section of ring road u 3e2 ety by Ejen Rairle highway C su q e B. New section o2 TH 164012 to to constructed as State. Project 27f,51 —O �% Capitol Square Building, Cedar Street at 10th Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Area 612, 227-9421 January 31, 1969 Mr. Adolph Tessness Clerk -Administrator Village of Chanhassen Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 RE: Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 275 Dear Mr. Tessness: The Village of Chanhassen Community Growth Guide Plan has been received by the Metropolitan Council for review on January 31, 1969. The Plan is being reviewed in conformance with the requirements of the Metropolitan Council Act that requires all contiguous units of government be notified and be allowed to request a hearing and present their views on your plan. Our review of this plan can be conducted more expeditiously if two more copies of the Growth Guide Plan could be sent. Should the Council need more information before completing the review, the staff will write or call your office. Thank you very much. Sincerely, METROPOLITAN COUNCIL By F(' James L. Hetland, jr. JLH:dms Chairman cc: Mr. Marvin Borgelt, Metropolitan Council District 1 An Agency Created to Coordinate the Planning and Development of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Comprising: Anoka County 0 Carver County 0 Dakota County 0 Hennepin County 0 Ramsey County 0 Scott County 0 Washington County