75-01 - Comp Plan Amendment pt 2r')
300 Metro Square Building, 7th Street and Robert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Area 612, 227- 9421
October 5, 1976
Mr. Bruce Pankonin, City Planner f�G` B�jG,
City of Chanhassen ',
P.O.Box 147 a-' OC(1976 cal
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 RECEIVED1
N VILLAGE OF.
Re: Chanhassen Plan Amendment IIANHASSEN,
MINN. V+
Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 3858 c'�� �`
Dear Bruce,
This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation of yesterday.
The Metropolitan Land Planning Act provision for Metropolitan Council
review of local comprehensive plan amendments does not go into effect
until after the City of Chanhassen receives its system statement. Until
then, the Council would review your plan under the old law. However,
the Council normally has not reviewed minor amendments such as that sub-
mitted by the City of Chanhassen which is similar to a single rezoning
issue. I would also note that the Council has established a policy of not
reviewing any more plans or plan amendments until the affected community
has received its system statement. This policy went into effect on
September 1, 1976.
I would recommend that Chanhassen simply withdraw its plan amendment.
However, if you still want it reviewed, it could be done because the
amendment was submitted before the new policy went into effect. If that
is your desire, the referral would be placed on the Chairman's Consent List
with emphasis on the city's assurance that rezoning would not take place
until services, including Lake Ann Phase II, were available.
Please let me know how you would like to proceed.
Sincerely,
Peggy A _ Reinhart
CC to John Rutford, Metro Council staff Policy Planner+v�y
An Agency Creed tP 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
291-6313
300 Metro Square Building, 7th Street and Robert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Area 612, 227- 9421
September 14, 1976
Mr. Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
P. O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Received on August 31, 1976
Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 3858
Dear Mr. Pankonin:
The planning documents identified above have been received by t1he Metropolitan
Council for review under provisions of the Metropolitan Council Act, 473. 175, -which
authorizes The Council 90 days in which to review and make comment; and recom-
mendations on the submitted plans.
The Plan will be reviewed in conformance with the requirements of the Metropolitan
Council Act. This Act requires that all contiguous and affected units of government
be notified and be allowed to request a hearing and present their views on your plan_.
Unless the units of government that have been notified have received copies of the
plan, you will be receiving requests from them for copies or the opportunity to
examine the plan at your offices,
Should the Council need more l,nformat. oa lbef„re completing the review, the staff
will write or call your office.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
ian
O TAN UN
Boland n'`'��irtllari �� 5 - P l 976
JB: emp � , RECEIVED v
VILLAGE OF•
CHANHASSEN,a'
'9 MINN. L� .
An Agency Created to Coordinate the Planning and Development of the Twin Cities Metropolitai rising:
Anoka County 0 Carver County 0 Dakota County 0 Hennepin County 0 Ramsey County 0 Scott County 0 Washington County
17761976
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O. BOX 147#CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 553170.(612) 474-8885
August 30, 1976
Mr. John Boland
Chairman Metropolitan Council
300 Metro Square Building
7th and Robert Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
RE: Chanhassen Plan Amendment
Dear Mr. Boland:
Pursuant to the Mandatory Planning Act, the City of Chanhassen.is
submitting the attached plan amendment for your agencies:considera-
tion and approval.
As shown in the attached, Chanhassen is considering,amending the
comprehensive plan by expanding the cities industrial -system an
additional 150 acres. This industrial expansion, will be served by the
Lake Ann Interceptor and local access to the subject property will be
provided via new County Road 17. This roadway is scheduled for
construction by Carver County'in 1979.-
As you know, Chanhassen will not allow.the rezoning of the subject
area to PID (Planned Industrial District)'nor will we issue building
permits until necessary utilities are. available. Because of the
"uncertainty" of the Lake Ann Interceptor we cannot,.at this time,
be more specific as to the timing, staging .and placement of the urban
services.
I trust you will find everything in order. If you or your staff have
any questions concerning the attached,, please feel free to cQntact
Mr. John Boland Atwuist 30, 1976
me at 474--8885.
tr ours,
Bruce Pankonin
City Planner
Enclosure
cc Kingsley Murphy
Don Ashworth, City Administrator
Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - June 16, 1976 -3-
DISCUSS ION&
Drs . fviolnau and Dubbe to Rezone Lots 1 and 2. :Block 1,-Frontier
Development Park from I-1 to CBD: ti motion was made by Walter Thomason
and seconded by Thomas Noonan for the Planning Commission to make a
recommendation to the City Council that they consider rezoning Lots 1
and 2, Block 1, Frontier Development Park from I-1 to C:BD. All in favor.
Motion carried.
DISCUSSION:
Elizabeth Sweiger to Subdivide Lot D, Bardwell Acres: Nick War itz
made a motion that we recommend to the.City Council the approve sub-
division of Lot D, :Bardwell Acres for Elizabeth Sweiger as .presented.
Thomas Noonan seconded. All in favor. Motion carried.
A motion was made by Walter Thompson to amend the agenda to consider the
Public Hearing for Plan Amendment. Thomas Noonan seconded. All in
favor. h1otion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING
PLAN AKENDMENT
JUI' E 16, 1976 AT 9:OO PNI
Hud Hollenback called the public hearing to order with the following
members present: Walter Thompson, Nick Waritz and Thomas Noonan.
Absent were: Les Bridger, 11v1a1 MacAlpine and Gerald Neher. The following
persons were present:
Al Kling:elhutz
Stelios Aslanid.is, f4pls.
I Ed Dunn, Mpls.
C. I`vi. `.towel, ivipls.
The City Planner read the official notice as published in the Carver
County Herald. Notices of this public hearing was not sent out to
the adjacent owners 'because there is no provision for that in the
Planning Ctatutes.
The City Planner gave his report: The request is to change the land use
desi-nation for certain lands located north of Lake Susan and south of
the railroad tracks from low density residential to industrial. This
public hearing is to consider the land use designation on'City Plan only.
It has nothing to do with rezoning subdivision plans and roads. It
involves amending the City Plan and nothing else. Many planning issues
will have to be resolved by the Planning Commission and the City Council
when considering Mr. Dunn's request. These issues include: 'ghat type of
land is most appropriate for lands abutting railroad tracks? ghat type
of industrial base, if any, does Chanhassen want in the future? What
degree of emphasis should be assigned to the conservation of natural
environment features? What positive or negative effects will a proposed
land use change and eventual implementation have on the City's social
and economic structure?
'�_1
Public Hearing
Plan ii-lendment
June 16, 1976
-4-
In the past, the steam locomotive produced noise vibrations, ash and
smoke which produced an industrial atmosphere which was highly detrimental
to land use. The railroad facilities today still have this effect but
on a less dramatic scale, Only realistic proposals formulated by the
Planning Commission can prevent mistake; from the past, being repeated
in the future. Industrial land uses *ve most frequently associated
with railroad tracks. The planned industrial eventually must confor�r!
to the obviously calculated needs of the community over a realistic
lanning period. Other uses must be ;found for the remainder of the land
butting: the railroad tracks. Commercial uses that involve storage are
of damaged by proximity noise and vibration of the railroad tracks.
esidential areas. require protection from railroad rights -of -way to
minimize noise vibration and pollution. This could be achieved to some
extent by planning lots that are really deep and keeping the houses
about 200 or 300 .feet away or a bufferzone of public lands between the
railroad tracks, but railroads do not like to see that type of use. In
either case, land adjacent to the railroad tracks should be planted. with
shrubs, etc. to minimize the presence of the railroad tracks. In summary,
depending upon market economics and local and regional accessibility
the land adjacent to the railroad tracks industrial is an appropriate
and compatible land use, but other issues should also be considered.
Manufacturing areas should be reasonably.level land. Preferable with
not more than SiU slope and the site should range from 5 plus acres in
size. They should have direct access to commercial. transportation
facilities, and access to rail, etc. They should be located in close
proximity to residential areas and areas of labor supply. The physical
constraints of fYir. Dunn's land if absorbed as industrial means that
Chanhassen will not have a typical type of industrial park development,
but rather it willbe absorbed in a similar and well -planned, well -
designed uses as found in the Jonathan Development Park. In a textbook
sense, the land is not appropriate for industrieN because of undulated
topography, but it can work and 1 think Jonathan has proved that. The
absorption of the property as industrial land should have far reaching;
positive effects on the City's economy and environment. Not only will
the industrial base increase the areas effective buying power but will
also act as a catalyst to absorb additional residential lard in the
sewered area. This is sornetliing we should be greatly concerned about.
In summary, I .feel that the land use options for the subject property
should be limited -to planned industrial development as proposed. This
amendment should have many positive effects. dlhat we really have to
consider is: If t;he City sells bonds for the ,'�ast Lotus Lake sewer
project, -the City's debt will be el
'8,438,000.00 for sewer and water.
How are going to pay for it? I strongly believe that stimulating:
the industrial corridor of the City will cause a faster rate of
absorption of residential lands in the urban service area than without
the industrial bay:. I think this is important to consider because
the City has already -.Wade a financial commitment in the sewered area.
If you want industries, this is a unique adventure.
Y
Public Hearincr
Plan Amendment
June 16, 1976
--5-
'ihe issue tonight is not the plan per se but rather what type of
identity Mr. Dunn's land should assume?
Les Lridger arrived at 9s 20 Pi'+.
Ed Dunn: Lie have checked with the Riley Creek Watershed District
and have been advised of the things that we need to
consider. We need to stay out of the wet land, low
spots and the creek area. There is a stipulation tiaA
we must stay 100 feet away and in addition, there is
a stipulation that we must stay out of the flood plain
area. of 1:iley Creek. The slopes are mostly in our
green belt areas so you can see that we are not trying
to work on the slopes.. The County and my designer
met on the new alignment of County -Road 17. It is
scheduled for construction in 1979.
ud Hollenback: Lilould this require a lift station if this land were
zoned industrial?
:mod Dunns It wouldn't require a lift station but if there were
a possibility of developing part of this property and
using -the lift station and pumping it into Lake Susan.
The line we're referring to is that which serves the
;south end of our property. The line comes on the shore
of Lake Susan and we.discussed the possibility to
pick up sewage from this area if it was necessary.
'L`he cost ,vas projected to be about �'80,000.00.
;hock Towle: I am very familiar with industrial parks and as an
interested party this looks like an outstanding plan.
I would recommend i. t highly.
iud: Do you see a need for this type of industry that
a by -Land use definition would be fit in this four
or Live acre plan?
I believe that there is a real legitimate market.
B; havin;- an opportunity to work here, people will
want to come out and live and visa a versa.
Bruce: 14 -is appropriate zoning designation for the subject
property.
J'alter 'Thompson: Does the railroad own any property other than their
right-of-way`:
Bruces L'he,y own a few isolated remnants from the old right -
or -way through Chanhassen. `.C'he real key issue is what
degree of emphasis you want to place on the natural
envi_ro.ntnent.
Hud: Could you kind of paraphase P-4?
Bruce: The purnose of the P-4 is to provide a planned
industrial development district of high quality,��� t
Public hearin
Plan Amendment
June 16, 1976 -6-
facilitating orderly growth. The uses in the P-4;
manufacturing, assembly of products, research testing
and experimentation, offices, wholesaling, ware h ou si n,"T.
It's very broad in.scope.
jdalter: flow does this differ from Jonathan?
Bruce: Jonathan really doesn't have the trails going; through
the park. But topographically it is very similar.
Les Bridgers ITow many acres are we talking about?
Hud: Let's define the area we are talking about here. The
parcel of land south of Hiway 5, east of County Road
17, north of the railroad tracks bordered on the east
by ;victor Schmieg farm conforms with the comprehensive
plan. Exhibit A defines the property -that we are
considering right now. How many acres in that?
Ed : 180 some acres south of the railroad tracks which is
a little more than half'.
Walter �111hompson made a motion that we close the public hearing for -the
Plan Amendment. Thomas Noonan seconded. Motion carried. Hearing
cloy at 9:1k0
Don Ashworth
Clerk -A d.mini s trator
Thomas Noonan made a motion to amend the agenda to discuss the third
public hearing (Plan Amendment) on the planned agenda defined as shown
on Exhibit A dated April 28, 1976, as presented by lair. Dunn. Nick
Naritz seconded. All in favor. Motion carried.
x,r]sULAR PLANNING CO'i'�'f:;IS;k_L P'i1LLLITYII JUT'�L 16, 1976
flud.: 44hat we have to consider is that quite a. bit of' our
industrial property has already been rezoned.
Bruce : No, the Frontier Development Park is the largest
industrial area that we have and we seem to be pickin
away at it by rezoning certain parcels to C-3 and CBU.
Hud: ghat we are talking about in Frontier is the car a,;.ency,
commercial development on the corner. How man,, acres
are left?
C. Towle: About 20 acres. If anything is light industrial in
that area, it would be a very small building, a more o'
a commercial type.
X214(1140
.% 1__�)
Chanhassen
Regular Planning Commission ivleeting Minutes
June 16, 1976
-7-
Hud: 'Chuck, what's your feeling on all commercial versus
commercial -industrial in Frontier Park?
Chuck: We have to consider what is commercial and what is
industrial. A lot of people feel that industrial is
a less desirable use. Some of your good planned
industries are far. more attractive in some respects
then iritensi.ve commercial use. What I would like to
see happen in frontier Park would be 'to have it in a
Cb.0 over-all plan where I would be able to bring in
proposals that I would assume to be acceptable to the
Gommi lion or the: Council. Your Animal Fair here ill
town is very attractive and from every sense of the
t,iord, that is an. industrial complex. In some respects
your commercial arid industrial uses overlap. I know
there has been discussion as to rezone the whole thing
as co�mrnercial or leave it industrial, What I want
to get across is to consider all the alternatives
-that iiaay be available in that area. `.1•he higher quality
development I can bring in, the better.
Nick: 'What I am considering is that there is no residential
development in that area. Now is probably a good time
to draw it in the plan as industrial and expanding
industrial may become more difficult as the residential
areas grow.
s: ghat percentage of the lower section in green are we
talking; about?
d: About 50 acres or 15 .
es: j4hat makes -this industrial park unique?
ruce: 12he typical industrial park seeks out land that is
relatively xla.t. This is rolling and undulating; in
topography. There is a lot of verticle relief so this
will not be a typical industrial park. Typical industrial
uses will not seek out this location.
es: -That odd shape piece in the white ( Victor Schmieg, property)
is there any inclination in the future of C)ossibly
acquiring that to make one neat package?
cd: We have that under discussion with i�Ir. Schmi_eg. 11e is
the owner. It's, his intention to have control right now.
uae have discussed it with him. It's also of significance
that the road there with the intersection will consume
a considerable amount of property. That already is
rezoned on the guide plan as industrial.
Chanhassen
Regular Planning Commission Meeting Wlinutes
June 16, 1976 -8-
Nick Waritz made a motion that the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council to amend the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan to designate
that area presented by INX. Dunn, Exhibit A, that portion south of the
railroad tracks 'be changed from low density residential to planned
industrial. Seconded by '�Jalter Thompson. All in favor. Motion carried.
Bruce s The City Council cannot take action until the Me tropoli tar
Council comments on the plan amendment. The next step
is forwarding; the proposal to the Metropolitan Council.
Walter Thompson made a motion to amend the meeting agenda to consider
the approval of the'June 9, 1976, meeting minutes. Les Bridger seconded.
All in favor. Motion carried.
AI1PI,10VAL OF is MUTES s Walter Thompson made a motion that we amend the
minutes of June 9, 1976, seconded by Thomas Noonan. All in favor. i4 otion
carried.
Amend Page 2 - .Ecklund/awedlund to read as fcllowss "the plan also calls
for the 100 year storm elevation of Lotus.;Lake and said that the green
area on the map remain open".
Page 4, following the motion that the request for public hearing, it
also be noted that the school should be checked for possible overflow
if the plan meeting requires more space than the council chambers.
Page 4, I=aragr.aph 2 should read, "he made a request to go on to the City
Council with Plan F to prevent more delay".
Page 4, Paragraph 9, arr,,end -to read, "property from R1A to PRD" .
Les Brid-;er moved and ,fa7_te,r `Thompson seconded that the meeting minutes
of June 9, 1976, be approved as amended. All in favor. i4otion carried.
SKtPTCH PLAN DISCUSSION �PUZ iJAA SC HIt,i11LPHi;`P.,ivIGs The City Planner read his
reports The land is located on Teton Lane. the proposal of Ilan "
Schimelphennig is to subdivide this land into two parcels. It's zoned
agreculture so the minimum lot size is 2 1/2 acres. He can subdivide
it because sanitary sewer and water is available. The two lots to be
created meet or exceed the minimum requirements of Ordinance No. 47.
The City Engineer in his report has determined that there should be
some right-of-way dedication a.lonk-� the east property line of U 1/2 feet
for the purposes of obtainin: sufficient right-of-way for Teton Lane,
which will be a City street some day. I suggest that we order a Public
Hearin; for this subdivision and request that the additional right-of-
way be dedicated to the City of Chanhassen.
Bill Brezinskys We recornmei7d approval with the dedication of 8 1/2 feet.
Walter Thompson moved sae hold a public hearing on July 14, 1976, at 8-s 30
Pi:-'., to cover the subdivision plan for Dan Schimelphennig. Thomas Noonan
seconded. All in favor.. Motion carried.
0 �_uT I ON e,C
vP �2
4i� Z
Q
1776-1976
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P 0 BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317®(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: June 16, 1976
TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Ed Dunn
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJ: Plan Amendment
The proposal before the commission is a request to change the land use
designation of certain lands located north of Lake Susan from low
density residential to industrial. The proposal is unique in that
many soot searching planning issues will have to be resolved by the
Commission and Council when considering Mr. Dunn's request. These
issues include, but are not liminted to, the following: What type
of land use is "appropriate" for land abutting a railroad track?;
What type of industrial base, if any, does Chanhassen want in the
future?; What degree of emphasis should be assigned to the conservation
of natural environmental features?; What positive or negative affects
will the proposed land use change and eventual.implementation have
on the City's social and economic intra-structure?; etc.
Land Use Abutting Railroad Tracks. In the past, the steam locamotive
produc.edl. noise, vibration, ash and smoke which created an "industrial"
atmosphere that was highly detrimental to adjacent land uses. The
railroad facilities of today still have this effect, although on
a less dramatic scale. A diesel -hauled freight train running at
higher speeds than in the past, still produces severe noise levels,
vibration and some air pollution.
Cities, like Chanhassen, continue to grow and unless their growth
occurs in a controlled manner in accordance with a rational plan,
the problems now presented by the railroad will continue to multiply.
Existing grade crossings in the fringe areas will become more heavily
used, and new housing will be proposed and built adjacent to railroad
Planning Commission -2- June 16, 1976
tracks and yards. Only realistic proposals formulated by the
Planning Commission can prevent the mistakes of the past from being
repeated to procreate the "urban blight of the future'."
Industrial land use is most frequently associated with railroads.
This is certainly the most appropriate use in some cases, assuming
that tttindustrial market exists, industrial sites can also be
served by municipal services and good arterial streett.. Of course,
if all the land adjacent to railroad lines are zoned for industry,, --
there would obviously be an excess of industrial lands. The area to
be zoned must conform to the calculated needs of the community over
a realistic planning period, and other uses must be found for the
remainder of the land.
Commercial uses (especially automobile sales, lumber yards, monument
works, and other uses that involve storage) are not damaged by
proximity to the noise and vibration of railroad trains. Recreational
areas, particularly large playfields, may also co -exist with railroads.
Residential areas, on the other hand, require protection from rail-
road right-of-ways to minimize noise, vibration and pollution. This
may be achieved, to some extent, by platting lots that back onto
railroad tracks so that they are at least 200 feet deep, or by
establishing a butter zone of public land between the railroad and
residential lots. In either case, land adjacent to the tracks should
be planted with shrubs and.trees of suitable variety to minimize
the presence of the railroad.
In summary, depending upon market economics and local and regional
accessibility, land adjacent to railroald tracks, for obvious reasons,
is an appropriate and compatible land use.
General principals relating to the location of industrial land
require a process of evaluation that is basically subjective, however,
the following parameters are often termed industrial location
standards: Source: Chapin, Stewart, Urban Land Use Planning,
pages 371-373:
1. "Industrial areas "should be located in convenient proximity
tol.iv ig areas where there are nearby inter -connecting transit and
thoroughfare routes to insure easy access back and forth, and should
be in convenient proximity to other (industrial areas) where uses
accessors to one another have access to inter -connecting truck routes.
2. Manufacturing Areas.
a. Reasonably level land, preferably with not more than 5%
slope, capable of being graded without undue expense.
b. Range of choice in close -in, fringe, and dispersed locations.
Extensive manufacturing: large open sites for modern one-story
buildings and accessory storage, loading and parking areas in fringe
and dispersed locations, usually 5 acres as a minimum, with some sites
10, 25, 50, or 100 or more acres depending on size of urban area and
economic outlook for industrial development of extensive lines of
activity.
Planning Commission
-3-
--1
June 16, 1976
Intensive manufacturing: variety of site sizes for modern one-story
or multiple -story buildings and accessory storage, loading, and parking
areas in close -in and fringe locations, usually under 5 acres.
C. Direct access to commerical transporation facilities;
in fringe and dispersed locations, access to railroad, major trucking
routes, cargo airports, and, in some urban areas., deep water channels;
and in close-in'.locations, for a major proportion of sites, access
to both railroad and trucking routes, with the balance adjoining
trucking thoroughfares or, if appropriate, port areas.
d. Within easy commuting time of residential areas of labor
force and accessible to transit and major throughfare routes directly
connected with housing areas.
e. Availability of utilities at or near the site such as
power, water, and waste disposal facilities.
f. Compatibility with surrounding uses, considering prevailing
winds, possibilities of protective belts of open space, development
of "industrial parks," and other factors of amenity both within the
manufacturing area and -in relation to adjoining land uses.
3. Wholesale and Reldted Use Areas.
a. Reasonably level land, preferably with not more than 5%
slope, capable of being graded without undue expense.
b. Range of choice in close -in and fringe locations, site sizes
usually under 5 acres.
C. Direct access to trucking routes and major street system
for incoming goods and outgoing deliveries; frontage on a commerical
street or in well -served wholesale centers essential; railroad
access for minor proportion of sites or centers.
d. Suitability for development of integrated centers, with
consideration for amenity within the development and adjoining areas."
As you can see from the proposed site plan, the vast majority of the
subject area has slopes in excess of 5%. What this constraint means
to me is that Chanhassen will not have the "typical" type of industrial
park development, but rather will be absorb similar to the well
planned and well designed uses found in Jonathan's industrial area.
The absorption of the subject property as industrial land should have
far reaching positive affects on the city's economy and environment.
Not only will the industrial base increase the areas effective
buying power but also will act as a catalist to absorb additional
residential land in the sewered areas. This, I believe, is the most
dynamic impact industrial land can have on the local economy, because
of the feasibility of the need for people to live close to work.
Pla,nni,ng Commission;
In summary, I feel the land
should be limited to planned
This amendment should have m
and the region.
-4- June 16, 1976
use options for the subject property
industrial develoment as proposed.
any positive effects on the City of Chanhassen
oLUTioN
�Q 2
A_
1776-1976
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 553170(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 14, 1976
TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Ed Dunn
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJ: Planning Case, PUD 76-01
APPLICANT: Ed Dunn
Please include the following enclosures with your copy of exhibit 1,
Ed Dunn, Lake Susan PUD:
10. Applicant's report dated June 6, 1976.
11. City Planner's report dated June 16, 1976.
(to be delivered under seperate cover).
Al
URBANSCOPE, INC. • 2614 NICOLLET AVENUE SO. • MINNEAPOLIS 55408 ■ (612) 827-5893
June 8, 1976
Mr. Bruce Pankonin, Planner
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
P.O.Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Bruce:
Attached please find the draft of the report relating to
updating of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
In addition to the text five exhibits have been prepared
to further explain the thesis for the update. I do not have
copies of the exhibits but if you wanted to look at them,
just give a call please and I will bring them to you.
Please remember that in order for me to prepare a final
report, your comments and input are very essential and
would be greatly appreciated, if I could have them some-
time prior to the date of the hearing.
Thank you very much for your assistance in this matter.
Very truly yours,
Stelios Aslanidis, Urban Designer
Urbanscope, Inc.
Enclosure4 op
', a
SF' i
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, That the Planning Commission of the City
of Chanhassen, Minnesota, will meet on Wednesday, the 16th day
of June, 1976, at 3:00 o'clock p.m. at the City Hall, 7610 Laredo
Drive, for the purpose of holding a public hearing for Ed Dunn
on a proposed amendment of Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan for
-1011W At
tract of land
"The North 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 and that part of Govenment
Lot 2 described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest
corner of said Lot 2; thence running East 13 degrees 25 minutes
South to the shore of Lake Susan; thence Southwesterly and
Southerly along the shore line of Lake Susan to the South
line of said Lott; thence West along the South line of Lot
2 to the southwest corner of said lot; thence North along
the West line of said Lot 2 to the place of beginning, Section
14, Township 116, Rnage 23, excepting therefrom that part
conveyed to Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railroad Company
by Book 23 of Deeds, Page 266; and excepting all lands lying
Northwest of railroad right of way, according to the United
States Government Survey thereof." and;
"That part of Government Lot 1, and Southwest 1/4 of the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 14, Township 116, Range 23, lying
South of the South line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul
and Pacific Railroad Co.; that part of Government Lot 2,
Section 14, Township 116, Range 23 lying Northeast of the
following described line; Beginning at the Northwest corner
or Lot 2; thence running East 13 degrees 25 Minutes South
to the East line of said Lot 2; and that part of Govenment
Lot 1, Section 13, Township 116, Range 23 lying Southerly
of State Highway No. 5; exept that part of Governmetn Lot
1, Section 14 and Government Lot 1, Section 13, conveyed to
Minnesota South District of the Lutheran Church - Missouri
Synod by Deed filed in Book 87 of Deeds, Page 439, according
to the United States Government Survey thereof."
A plan showing said proposed plan amendment is available for inspection
at the City Hall.
All persons interested may appear and be heard at said time and
place.
BY ORDER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
/s/ Bruce Pankonin
City Planner
Dated May 28, 1976
(Pub. June 3, 1976, in the Carver County Herald)
`,�O\_UTION R,
1776-1976
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317o(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 23, 1976
TO: Planning Commission and Ed Dunn
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJ: Planning Case PUD 76-01
APPLICANT: Ed Dunn
Please include the following enclosures with your copy of Exhibit 1,
Ed Dunn Lake Susan PUD:
Enclosures
5. Planning Commission minutes dated September 24, 1975.
6. Sketch Plan Lake Susan PID.
7. City Engineer's report dated April 9, 1976.
8. Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District report dated April 7, 1976.
9. City Planner's report dated April 28, 1976. (To be delivered
under seperate cover).
` WILLIAM D. SCHOELL
CARLISLE MADSON
JACK T. VOSLER
JAMES R. ORR
HAROLD E. DAHLIN
LARRY L. HANSON
RAYMOND J. JACKSON
WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY
JACK E. GILL
FRANK V. LASKA
City of Chanhassen
c/o Mr. Bruce Pankonin,
City Planner
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Gentlemen:
- SCHOELL & MADISON, INC.
ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS
338-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
Subject:
April 9, 1976
Lake Susan P.I.D. - Sketch Plan
Review.
We have reviewed the sketch plan for the Lake Susan P.I.D.
prepared by Urbanscope and our comments follow.
The number of entrances to Highway 5 should be minimized.
We think the accesses should be limited to three; 1) existing
County Road 17 south; 2) future County Road 17 south; and 3)
temporary access at the northeast corner of the tract (present
church entrance). The northeast access should be removed as
soon as future County Road 17 is extended south of the railroad
tracks (scheduled for 1979 construction) or an east access is
provided by connection of the tract with Highway 101. The
plan should provide adequate right-of-way for the future Highway
5 - County Road 17 interchange.
Sanitary sewer service can best be provided to this develop-
ment through connection to the future Lake Ann Interceptor.
Although the scheduling for the Interceptor is not definite,
completion is expected in 1980 or before.
As an alternative to the Interceptor, a temporary lift
station connected by force main to the Lake Susan sewer on the
Lyman property could be constructed. The proposed development
could then utilize the capacity of the Lake Susan line not used
by the normal tributary area.
SCHOELL & MAOSON, lNc.
City of Chanhassen
Page 2 April 9, 1976
Development of this property as proposed will require addi-
tional water storage and trunk watermain construction and possibly
additional supply facilities.
The plan has been submitted to the Riley -Purgatory Creek
Watershed District for review. We have been advised their com-
ments will be available for the April 21, 1976 Planning Commission
meeting.
We recommend the Developer be encouraged to proceed with the
planning process and offer our assistance in engineering consider-
ations.
Very truly yours,
SCHOELL & biADSO, INC.
U
W,TBrezinsky:sjr
cc: Stelios Aslandis, Urbanscope
Regular Planning Comm~ssion MeetSeptember 24�,1975 -5-
LAKE SUSAN HILLS: Ed Dunn, Jim Curry, Stelios Aslanedis.were present.
The property under consideration is approximately 930 acres generally
in the vicinity of Lake Susan south to Lyman Blvd. The existing zoning
is R-lA. Sanitary sewer is available to a portion of the property.
around Lake Susan.
The City Attorney in a letter to the Planning Commission dated November
14, 1973, gave an opinion on the Nordskov Development which parts.of
that opinion would apply to Lake Susan Hills. "As to the Nordskov plan
it is my view that at the present time the proposal must be limited
solely to consideration of the plan as a sketch plan under Section
14.05 (2) of the Zoning Ordinance. Any further consideration of the
matter beyond the sketch plan stage is contrary to the spirit and
intent of the City Council Resolution of September 11, 1972, # 119721,
which states explicitly that 1) land proposed to be developed as a
planned unit development district not currently served by sanitary
sewer and water will not be considered beyond the sketch plan stage
as setforth in the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance, The applicant may
prepare a sketch plan with such supplementary documentation setforth
in Section 14.05 (3) (a) as the applicant desires for review and informal
discussion by the Planning Commission. When the necessary utilities
needed to serve the proposed development are available or are imminent
the applicant may then proceed to the preliminary development plan as
specified in Section 14.05 (3) 'of Ordinance 47.
The Planner gave the history of the Lake Ann Interceptor Phase 2. He
Ike
ggested the Planning Commission and Council consider amending the
ty Comprehensive,Plan. After the amendment is completed the -Planning
mmission will have city guidelines in which to judge the proposed PUD.
ending the Comprehensive Plan compliments the Planning Commission's
rk program and the Metropolitan Council's time schedule for the
Ann Phase 2 Interceptor.
City Attorney suggested the Planning Commission might consider an
ndment to the Guide Plan encompassing this area. An amendment
the plan will have to go to the Metropolitan Council.
Dunn explained the history of the partnership in acquiring the land.
stated they agree with.the concept of amending the Guide Plan.
City Planner would like to free up as much of his time as possible
spend on the Comprehensive Plan if the Planning Commission and
ncil feel that is important.
'motion was made by Mal MacAlpine and seconded by Nick Waritz that the
lanning Commission decide that the amendment to the Comprehensive
lan is the number 1 priority and we attempt to get it completed at a
ime that our Planner says that he can logically do it if his time
s left free to work on it. After much discussion Nick Waritz withdrew
is second and Mal MacAlpine withdrew the motion.
Mr. Dunn asked if the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and their
sketch plan could run concurrently so that all is ready when the Lake
Ann Interceptor Phase 2 is built in 1977. The Planning Commission will
review Lake Susan Hills when they have progressed further in 'the City
Work Program.
ADMINISTRATIVE.PROCEDURES MANUAL: Planning Commission members will go
through their assigned chapters at the next meeting.
Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District
April 7, 1976
Mr. William Brezinsky
Schoell & Madson, Inc.
50 Ninth Avenue South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
Re: Lake Susan P.I.D.'--Development Concept Plan
Transmitted March 26, 1976
Dear Mr. Brezinsky:
8950 COUNTY ROAD tt4
EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55343
f� A m i'
RECEIVED
C� VILLAGE O!e'
Eli CHANHASSEN,
r MINN,
The engineering advisors to the Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District
have reviewed the development concept plan for the Lake Susan P.I.D. as
submitted to the District. The following Watershed District policies and
criteria are applicable to this project:
1. The District's 100-year frequency floodplain delineation
for Riley Creek and Lake Susan was based on the updated
land use plan prepared for Chanhassen by Nason, Wehrman,
Knight and Chapman, Inc. This land use plan indicates
single-family residential land use in the area south of
the CM STP&P Railroad and north of Lake Susan. If the
City proposes to revise this land use plan, the 100-year
frequency floodplain for Riley Creek and Lake Susan will
have to be redefined based on the revised land use in
this area. All building floor elevations must be con-
structed a minimum of 2 feet above the 100-year frequency
floodplain.
2. The Watershed District notes that a number of lots are
shown platted into the floodplain of Riley Creek. Pro-
posed fill into the floodplain must be reviewed by the
District for conformance with the District's floodplain
encroachment criteria.
3. The District recommends that no structures be built within
100 feet of the center line of Riley Creek. The develop-
ment plan indicates that a number of lots will be platted
within 100 feet of the stre.mt.
Mr. William Brezinsl
Page 2
April 7, 1976
4. A utility plan for the project should be submitted to the
District for review. Because of the close proximity of
the development to Riley Creek and to Lake Susan, permanent
storm water storage and sediment control ponds should be a
part of the storm sewer plan. The development will likely
generate a significant quantity of oil due to the large
amounts of impervious area within the project, therefore,
skimming devices for the settling basins should be included
in the storm sewer plan.
5. As with all developments within the District, a grading and
land alteration permit must be obtained from the District for
this project. The permit must be accompanied by a detailed
erosion control plan. This plan should include erosion
control measures to be employed during and after construction.
6. The District notes that three road crossings of Riley Creek
are proposed for this development. It is the policy of the
District to discourage needless crossings of the creek and water
areas within the District. Further information justifying the
need for these crossings must be submitted to the District for
review.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the development at an early
date. If you have any questions, please contact us at 920-0655.
AG:ps
c: Mr. Conrad Fiskness
Mr. Frederick Richards
Mr. Russell Larson
Mr. Gerald Schlenk
Sincerely,
P&A"
Allan Gebhard
Barr Engineering Co.
Engineer for the District
?UN('ii .. N
)Ur i
44 7G
10OLUTION e/
w� 22
Q
1776-1976
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE OP 0 BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317o (612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: September 18, 1975
TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Ed Dunn
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJ: Planning Case PUD 75-01
Background
1. Community Location: The property under consideration contains
930+ acres located in the general vicinity
of Lake Susan, Chanhassen, Minnesota.
2. Existing Zoning: R-lA, Residential Agricultural.
3. Sanitary Sewer is presently available to property south of
Lake Susan.
4. Municipal water is not available.
Petition
The applicant is requesting sketch plan review pursuant to Ordinance
47, Section 16, Subsection 16.04.
Planner's Comments
1. The proposition of absorbing 930 acres of real estate into the
urban environment is, indeed, very enthusiastic, challenging;
and will require a lot of work on the part of the applicant,
City Staff, and Planning Commission. To make a transition
from agricultural to "urban land," I believe the first order
-2-
of business should be to set forth the ground rules upon
which the petition will be considered. These rules are,
for the most part, spelled out in City Oridnances.28, 33,
33A, 38, 45, 47, 47A, 47B, and City Council Resolution
No. 119721. I hope the discussion on Wednesday,
September 24, 1975, will center soley on procedual
issues and we will not be side tracted into discussing
the relative merits of the sketch plan. A concentrated
debate on the merits of.the plan will be discussed during
future meetings.
2. The City attorney stated the following opinions on November 14,
1973, in regard to the "Nordskov PUD." The contents of
Mr. Larson's letter also pertain to Planning Commission
consideration of Ed Dunn's Lake Susan Development.
The pertinent sections of Mr. Larson's letter are as follows:
"As to the Nordskov plan, it is my view that at the present
time the proposal must be limited solely to consideration of
the plan as a "sketch plan" under section 14.05(2) of the
Zoning Ordinance. Any further consideration of the matter
beyond the sketch plan stage is contrary to the spirit and
intent of the Council resolution of September 11, 1972
(No. 119721) which states explicitly that:
1. Land proposed to be developed as a Planned Development
District not currently served by sanitary sewer and water
will not be considered beyond the Sketch Plan stage as
set forth in the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
2. The applicant may prepare a Sketch Plan with such
supplementary documentation set forth under Section.14.05,
paragraph 3(a), as the applicant desires for review and
informal discussion by the Planning Commission.
3. When the necessary utilities needed to serve the
proposed development are available or are imminent,
the applicant may then proceed to the Preliminary
Development Plan as specified in Section 14.05, paragraph 3,
of Ordinance #47, Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
We are all aware that the Metropolitan Council proposes to
delay authorizing Phase II of the Lake Ann Interceptor to
1977, notwithstanding the fact that the Sewer Board had
planned the project for 1975. Even if Phase II is planned for
1975, our experience has been that there are frequent delays
in implementing a project (viz. Phase I, Lake Ann Interceptor),
so one can hardly say that service is available or imminent
until such time as the project is funded, engineered by both
the Metro Council and Sewer Board staffs, and contracts let
for the work.
1 �
-3-
It should be kept in mind that the resolution states an
applicant may proceed to the preliminary development plan
only when the necessary utilities needed to serve the proposed
development are available or are imminent. Imminent is
defined as likely to happen without delay. At the present time
it cannot be said that the Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II,
is either available or imminent to serve the Nordskov property.
It seems pertinent at this time to refer you to an exchange
of letters between Dan Herbst and myself dated August 10 th
and August 18th, 1972, which letters give a good insight
into the background for Resolution 119721. You should have
copies of these letters in your file.
We have the further problem of Ordinance No. 45 (the 2-1/2 acre
ordinance) which provides that the platting and subdivision of
land within areas not served by sanitary sewer shall be prohibited
until sewer is available to serve such area."
In summary it appears that a planned unit development cannot
be considered beyond the sketch plan stage when sanitary
sewer is not immediately available.
3. The procedures for sketch plan review are stated in Ordinance 47,
Section 14.05, Subd 2. "Submission of a sketch plan shall
not constitute formal filing of an application for development
of a P-1 (also P-3) district. On the basis of the sketch plan,
the Planning Commission may informally advise the applicant
of the extent to which the plan conforms to the Comprehensive
Village Plan, and the standards of this (Ordinance 47) and
other Ordinances of the Village, and may discuss possible
modifications necessary to implement approval of the plan."
In summary, Section 14.05, Subd 2, directs the Planning Commission
to comment only on the compliance of the sketch plan to
Comprehensive City Plan and possible modification necessary
to implement approval of the plan. Bear in mind, however, any
modification necessary to implement the plan cannot usurp
other City Ordinances, namely Ordinance 45-
4. Pursuant to Section 14.05, Subd 2, I have reviewed Ed Dunn's
sketch plan. The only areas of compliance to the City Plan
are 53.7 acres of Industrial land in the northwest of
County Road 17, certain elements of the linear open space system
and ;the;:general:arterial�and collector street network. With
this in mind, the following question arises: From what
perspective can the planning debate the strength and weaknesses
of Mr. Dunn's plan when the plan is inconsistant, for the most
part, with the Comprehensive City Plan? I believe two answers
are available. The first would involve the City Council
consider repealing Ordinance 45, Resolution 119721 and Section
14.05 of the Zoning Ordinance #47. The other option is amending
the City Comprehensive Plan. I would strongly object to the
first option but would whole heartedly support the Planning
Commission and City Council consider amending the City Plan.
-4- J
As you know, any plan amendment will involve a great deal
of study by the commission on the relative merits of the
amendment and will be carefully debated. The general public
will be involved, the Metropolitan Council will make recom-
mendation and the City Council will make the ultimate decision.
This procedure seems to be the only option available at the
present time.
5. Presuming the City Council amends the Comprehensive Plan, then
the Planning Commission will have stated City guidelines upon
which to judge Mr. Dunn's proposed PUD. The time for this
amendment dovetails rather well with the Planning Commission
work program and the Metropolitan Council's time schedule
for the Lake Ann Phase II Interceptor.
6. In summary, the above states that the Planning Commission
cannot consider Mr. Dunn's plan beyond sketch plan stage.
The plan is inconsistant with the adopted City Plan, the
Planning Commission should consider amending the plan, and
finally Mr. Dunn's sketch plan should be considered in light
of the future City Plan components.
OLUTION B/
c�
cum �2
� y
Q r
Ae
1776-1976
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE�qP.O BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 553179(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 18, 1975
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
TO: Planning Commission and Ed Dunn
SUBJ: Planning Case PUD 75-01
The following enclosures are contained herein:
Enclosures
1. Community Location Graphic.
2. Sketch Plan Graphic.
3. Applicant's Designer's report dated September 1, 1975.
4. City Planner's report dated September 18, 1975.
L7L 0 00
h/bciem 1. System T
URBANSCOPE, INC. - 2614 NICOLLET AVENUE SO. - MINNEAPOLIS 55408 • (612) 827-5893
LAKE SUSAN P.U.D.
September 1, 1975
ACREAGE BREAKDOWN PER TYPE OF USE
1.RESIDENTIAL
Suburban (Low)Density ( 0-4 D.U./acre) 63.6 acres
Mid -Density ( 5-8 D.U./acre) 75.6 "
Medium Density ( 9-15 " " ) 93.7
High Density (15+ 'T „ ) 87.3 'r
320.2 acres
2.RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ...................................... 70.0
3.COMMERCIAL................................................. 34.0 „
4.INDUSTRIAL.................................................. 250.4 „
5.PUBLIC & QUASI PUBLIC ....................................... 27.0
6.COMMUNITY PARK ............................................. 36.9 „
7.OPEN SPACE -TRAILS ........................................... 125.0
8.ROAD R.O.W.'s.............................................. 66.6 r,
930.1 acres
UNIT/POPULATION BREAKDOWN
Acres
D.U./Ac.
Units
People/D.U.
Population
Suburban Density
63.6
2.0
127
3.4.
432
Mid -Density
75.6
6.5
491
2.8
1,374
Medium Density
93.7
12.0
1124
2.2
2,473
High Density
87.3
15.0
1309
2.2
2,880
TOTAL
320.2 8.8 3,051 2.6 7,159
Overall density=3,051/320.2= 9.5D.U./Ac.
Overall density including Open Space= 3,051/320.2+125.0= 6.8 D.U./Ac.
Overall dens. includ. Open Space & Rd.R.O.W.= 3,051/44.5.2+66.6= 5.96D.U./Ac.
LAKE SUSAN P.b.D
Page Two
September 1, 1975
UNIT/SCHOOL AGE POPULATION
(S.A.P.) BREAKDOWN
(K-12)
Units
S.A.P./Unit
Total
Suburban Density
127
0.9
114
Mid -Density
491
0.6
294
Medium Density
1,124
o.15
168
High Density
1,304
0.15
195
TOTAL 771
CHANHASSEN Sanitary Sewer Planning
Feb. 5, 1975
Met -with Messrs. Ed Dunn, Thelios , Bruce Pankonin, Jerry
Schlenk, Mayor Klingelhutz today. Ed said that a member of the Metro.
Council had told him that his impression is that construction of any
further extensions of the Lake Ann Interceptor would not occur until
about 2020. Ed says that that is too long away for him.
He also said that them member had confered by phone.with Bob Davis
of the MC staff, who corroborated the 2020 date.
The pecking order on the MC staff apparently is: Frank Lamm, .Environ-
mental Engr, Karl Burandt, Asst. Env. Engr, and Bob Davis, in charge of
the.staff preparing the Metro Development Guide.
w Means'of improving this time schedule were discussed. It'was agreed
that perhaps a meeting, with dinner, at the Frontier (so'as to show, them
that Chanhassen is a pretty sophisticated urban center) might do some -
-good. People who should be invited would be like Tom Kelm, a Chanhassen
native whom Al K...-knows personally, Mr. Boland, Chrmn of the MC, Mr.
Hoffman, Chmn of the Metro Guide Committee, Kingsley Murphy, our rep
on the MC, Senator -Schmitz and Rep. Jopp, Ed and possibly Herb Bloomberg.
Date tentatively set is Wednesday, Feb. 19th. Ed and Al think our pres-
ence would.be helpful, as well as -Bruce Pankonin'.s.
The bone of contention seems to be that, although the Metro Sewer
Bd has laid out a time schedule for construction of the Lake Ann Int.
in 1977,--this has never been -approved by the MC. I.thought that this
might reflect some antipathy between the staffs of the MC and the Sewer
Bd, but perhaps this is not the case. In any event,: it becomes apparent
that the MC, and particularly the MC staff, wants to be the big dog in
controlling where development will occur in the future.
I will be in Texas that week, so I hope that you can make the meeting.
The consensus seemdd to be that we should have a heart-to-heart talk with
our old buddy, Frank Lamm, -before the meeting if possible, ro get it straight
from the horse's mouth.
cc: Bruce
v O �C=C� O
community development services
2614 nicollet avenue south, minneapolis, minnesots 55408 • ph: (612)8275893
in association with
Modern Urban Systems Technology, Inc. st. louis, missouri.
Mr. Bruce Panconin
Director of Planning
City of Chanhassen , Minn.
55317
Dear Bruce,
January 27,1975
I am enclosing for your convenience a copy of the Data -Sheet of the proposed
Lake Susan P. U. D. I am looking forward to meeting with you the 5th of February, and as-
sured of a fruitful cooperation leading to the successful conclusion of the project to the inte-
rest of both the City of Chanhassen and my clients.
Very truly yours
• l
Stelios Aslanidis
YC k
UTILITY SU -1.
f2
community development services onto
2614 nicollet avenue south, minneapolis, minnesota 55406 • ph: [612)6275893
Modern Urban Systems Technology, Incin association with
C. rot. louis, missouri.
LAKE SUSAN PUD
November 5, 1974
A. ACREAGE BREAKDOWN PER TYPE OF USE
1. RESIDENTIAL
Suburban (Low) Density (0-4 D. U. /Ac.) 136. 5 ac.
or 14. 6 %
Mid -Density (5-8 D. U. /Ac.) 116.5 ac.
or 12.5 %
Medium Density (9-15 D. U. /Ac.)' 173.9 ac.
or 18.7 %
High Density ( 15 + D. U. /Ac.) 87. 3 ac.
or 9. 4 %
514.2 acres
55.0 %
2. Research and Development ............................
92.0 acres
9.8 %
3. Commercial...........................a........0....
55.3 acres
5.9 %
4. Industrial ...........................................
53.7 acres
5.7 %
5. Public and Quasi Public ...............................
27.0 acres
2.9 %
6. Park and Open Space .................................
125.0 acres
13.5 %
7. Road R. O. W. # 101 + Old # 101 11.1 ac.
E-West Collector 13.2 ac.
N-South Collector 14.7 ac.
# 17 23.1 ac. ........ 62.1 acres
6.7 %
929.3 acres
B. UNIT/POPULATION BREAKDOWN
Acres
D. U. /Ac.
Units
People/D. U.
Population
Suburban (Low) Density 136.5
2.0
273
3.2
873.6
Mid -Density 116.5
6.5
757
2.8
2,116.8
Medium Density 173.9
12.0
2,086
2.2
4,589.2
High Density 87.3
15.0
1,309
2.2
2,879.8
TOTAL 514.2
8.6
4,425
2.6
10, 459.4
When Park and Open Space is
included:
514.2 + 125.0 = 639.2 acres at 6.9 units/acre = 4.425 units
When road r. o.w. is also included:
639.2 + 62.1 = 701.3 acres at 6.3 units/acre = 4.425 units
C. OVERALL GROSS DENSITY 6.3 D. U. /Acre
LAKE SUSAN PUD
November 5, 1974
Page Two
D. UNIT/SCHOOL AGE POPULATION (S. A. P.) BREAKDOWN (K-12)
Units S.A. P/Unit Total
Suburban Density
273
0.9
245
Mid -Density
757
0.6
454
Med. -Density
2, 086
0.15
312
High -Density
1,309
9.15
196
TOTAL 1207
RUSSLLL 11. LARSON
ATTORNEY AT LAW
1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
November 14, 1973
Mr. John Neveaux
Chairman, Planning Commission
Village of Chanhassen
Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Re: Nordskov of Chanhassen
Planned Unit Development (P-2)
Dear Mr. Neveaux,
TELEPFI ONE
335-9565
In response to your request that I comment on the proposal of Nordskov that
"concept approval of the Planned Unit Development" for its 175 acres be given
at this time by the Planning Commission, I submit herewith the following opinion.
At the outset, let me state that under the Planning Commission Ordinance (No. 28)
the Commission is an advisory body to the Village Council, and its function is
limited to the making of recommendations to the Council in the various areas of
its jurisdiction. Stated in another way, it is reasonable to conclude that the
Commission lacks authority to grant approval of any type of development plan.
As to the Nordskov plan, it is my view that at the present time the proposal
must be limited solely to consideration of the plan as a "sketch plan" under
section 14.05(2) of the Zoning Ordinance. Any further consideration of the
matter beyond the sketch plan stage is contrary to the spirit and intent of the
Council resolution of September 11, 1972 (No. 119721) which states explicitly
that:
1. Land proposed to be developed as a Planned Development
District not currently served by sanitary sewer and water will
not be considered beyond the Sketch Plan stage as set forth in
the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. John Neveaux Page 2 November 14, 1973
2. The applicant may prepare a Sketch Plan with such supple-
mentary documentation set forth under Section 14.05, paragraph
3(a) , as the applicant desires for review and informal discussion
by the Planning Commission.
3. When the necessary utilities needed to serve the proposed
development are available or are imminent, the applicant may then
proceed to the Preliminary Development Plan as specified in
Section 14.05, paragraph 3, of Ordinance #47, Chanhassen Zoning
Ordinance.
We are all aware that the Metropolitan Council proposes to delay authorizing
Phase II of the Lake Ann Interceptor to 1977, notwithstanding the fact that the
Sewer Board had planned the project for 1975. Even if Phase II is planned for
1975, our experience has been that there are frequent delays in implementing a
project (viz. Phase I, Lake Ann Interceptor) , so one can hardly say that service
is available or imminent until such time as the project is funded, engineered
by both the Metro Council and Sewer Board staffs, and contracts let for the work.
It should be kept in mind that the resolution states an applicant may proceed to
the preliminary development plan only "when the necessary utilities needed to
serve the proposed development are available or are imminent". "Imminent" is
defined as "likely to happen without delay". At the present time it cannot be
said that the Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II, is either available or imminent to
serve the Nordskov property.
It seems pertinent at this time to refer you to an exchange of letters between
Dan Herbst and myself dated August loth and August 18th, 1972, which letters
give a good insight into the background for Resolution 119721. You should have
copies of these letters in your file.
We have the further problem of Ordinance No. 45 ( the 2-1/2 acre ordinance)
which provides that the platting and subdivision of land within areas not served
by sanitary sewer shall be prohibited until sewer is available to serve such area.
Turning now to the legal implications which are manifest in the grant of "concept
approval" for the Nordskov Planned Unit Development at this time, I can foresee
that strong and possibly legally persuasive, arguments could be made by Nordskov
on a number of points if later the Village insisted on changes in the plan. These
points are:
1. Density
2. Zoning
3. Roads
4. Open space and park
5. Ecological/environmental impact
Mr. John Neveaux Page 3 November 14, 1973
In short, to grant "concept approval" at this time could have the effect of saying
to Nordskov that "your plan is acceptable to the Commission in all respects"
and could be construed to constitute approval of a preliminary development plan.
This is contrary to the intent of Resolution 119721 and Ordinance 45, and beyond
the authority of the Commission under the Zoning Ordinance and the Planning
Commission enabling ordinance (No. 28) if a strict construction is placed on the
"advisory only" function of the Commission.
By way of summary, -it is my opinion that the resolution forestalls any further
consideration, including the question of "concept approval", of the Nordskov PUD
because sewer is neither available nor imminent to. serve the property.
Russell H. Larson
Chanhassen Village Attorney
RHL: m
R.USSrLL H. LARsON
ATTORNEY AT LAw
igoo FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
August 18, 1972
Mr. Daniel J. Herbst
7305 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Re Planned Development Districts
Dear Dan,
TELEPI3ONE
335�9u05
Reference is made to your letter of August 10, 1972, in which you develop
the question of whether the Village can legally take the position that
Planned Development District proposals should not be finally approved
unless the utilities which are needed to serve the site are available.
In my opinion, the Village does have the right to withhold approval until
utilities, especially sewer and water, are available to the site. A
municipal council may adopt zoning ordinances and regulations if they
are reasonable and not arbitrary. What best furthers the public interest is
a matter primarily for determination of the legislative body concerned, the
Village Council in this case. This authority also extends to matters of
policy, and zoning, regulations will be sustained as a legitimate exercise
of the village powers In the absence of a showing of arbitrary, discrimina-
tory,. or unreasonable application of the restrictive provisions. In
determining the constitutionality or validity of a zoning ordinance or regu-
lation, it is presumed that the legislative body investigated and found
conditions such that the ordinance or regulation which it adopted was
appropriate. If an ordinance or regulation is not clearly unreasonable and
arbitrary and if it operates uniformly on all persons similarly situated, it
will be upheld by the courts.
You have raised a very important point when you state that a plan or a planned
unit development which makes sense to a community at the time of approval
may not be in the best interest of the village if that same plan is built three,
five or possibly ten years from now. To this I might add that the same might
be true of the developer in the sense that his approved plan may not be in his
best interest in later years when utilities are available and he is only then
able to go forward with his project.
Daniel J. Herbst -2- August 18, 1972
Many things can take place to bring about changes in a particular plan between.
the date of its submission and the date sewer and water are available, at
which later date the developer would first be able to proceed with his plan.
Changing technology in construction, including materials and design, could
come about in that interim period, changing planning concepts might also be
involved, and most certainly changes in the terms of financing planned unit
developments would be a most important factor to consider.
Looking beyond the local level, we cannot be sure that in the future we at the
municipal level will be able to do our own planning and zoning as these functions
may be taken over at the metropolitan area of government, or greatly influenced
by the metro government. These signs are with us now, and a plan approved
today which is not scheduled for development until some years later may be
substantially affected by metro area planning.
As you know, the procedural steps leading to planned development district.
approval are complex and changes occurring between the time the plan is first
submitted and the time at which it is actually developed can greatly complicate`
the execution of the plan, and most certainly would mean considerable
additional expense to the developer.
Going one step further, we do have in force Ordinance No. 45 (the 2-1/2 acre
ordinance) which provides that the platting and subdivision of land within areas
of the village not served by the village sanitary sewer system shall be prohibited
until said sewer system is available to serve each such area. The ordinance
also provides that no building permits shall be issued for commercial, industrial
or multiple residential development unless the proposed development site is
served by the village sanitary sewer system.
It is my view that the Planning Commission should recommend to the Council
the adoption of a resolution setting forth that Planned Development District
plans shall not be approved until sewer and water are available to the site,
but that the developer may submit a sketch plan to the Planning Commission
for informal discussions in accordance with the provisions of Section 14.05(2)
of the Zoning Ordinance. The sketch plan could be supplemented with certain
of the documentation called for under Subsection 3, Proposed Preliminary De-
velopment Plan, but that all proceedings would stop at that point until utilities
are available. The submission of the sketch plan would make the Commission
Daniel J. Herbst -3- August 18, 1972
and the Council aware of the developer's proposal, and the developer would
also be made aware of the present thinking of the Commission and Council
on the proposal.
In summary, T am of the opinion that the Village can legally take the position
that developments are not to be finally approved unless utilities are available
to the site.
Veit' truly "o
russe 1 H. Larson
Chanhassen Village Attorney
RHL:b
cc John Neveaux
Adolph Tessness
August 10, 1972
Mr. Russell H. Larson
Attorney at Law
1st National Bank Building
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Dear Russ:
Last night the Planning Commission entered into a discussion
relative to considering sizable developments (PUD's) planned
for areas where utilities will not be extended for a number
of years. A motion was made by the Planning Commission that
I pose this problem with you and report back to the Planning
Commission on Tuesday, August 2.2, 1972.
Russ, to give you some background to our discussion during
last night's meeting our agenda contained a discussion on the
updating of Oakmont as well as the concept plan of Nordskov.
Although I am not totally familiar with the Oakmont plan
as I generally understand it, it is a development on 180 acres
for 2,800 dwelling units. The development of same is to
commence as soon as sanitary sewer is available to the site.
I am sure this is an oversimplification of the development,
but we now -have before us a concept plan for Nordskov which
involves 240 acres of land including a specific proposal for,
80 acres involving five or six.land uses on that parcel.
Again, no sewer and water are available.
The concern I raised with the Planning Commission related to
the importance of timing in the planning process and also
the importance for our village to have development contracts
with developers. An important item of these development con-
tracts is of course the time scheduling that relates to each
phase of the development. When the Village Council approves
a planned unit development with no definite starting date
other than that construction would begin when sewer and water
Mr. Russell H. Larson
Page Two
August 10, 1972
is available the element of timing is lost in the planning
and development process. Since our municipality is depen—
dent on the decisions of the Metropolitan Council with respect
to approving sewer interceptors, a development in affect
could be approved by the Village Council and remain as a
future plan for the Village for a long period of time. A
plan or planned unit development which makes sense to a
community at the time of approval may not be in the best interest
of'the Village if,that same plan is.built three, five or
possibly ten years from now.
To prevent the municipality from having a number of these
plans pending with no scheduled starting date, could the
Village of Chanhassen legally take the position that develoD-
ments will not be finally approved unless the utilities which
are needed to serve that site are also approved. Utilities
and developments are kind of a "chicken and egg" type of
problem, but it may be possible for areas which will not be
immediately served by utilities that _a_concept approval of
the plan could be given by the Planning Commission. Then,
when uti iti.es are available to serve this site or are
imminent that the developer would then be allowed to proceed
beyond the concept stage for subsequent approval by the
Village Council.
Russ, please call me if you have a question relating to
this request. T would like to be prepared to give an answer
to the Planning Commiss.on at our next -meeting.
tMn
ly yours,
iiel J. Herbst
DJH : cg
cc Mr. John Neveaux
Mr. Adolph Tessness
t/
MINUTES.OF REGULAR MEETING
THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF
RILEY-PURGATORY CREEK WATERSHED
Chairman Pennie
on March 1, 1978 at
Minnesota.
March 1, 1978
OF
DISTRICT
called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
the Eden Prairie City Hall, Eden Prairie,
Managers present: Wm. Sault, C. Fiskness, D. Pennie,
H. Peterson.
Also present were board advisors Allan Gebhard and Frederick
Richards.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of February 1,
which it was moved by Peterson,
minutes be approved as drafted
motion carried unanimously.
Correspondence and Publications
1978 were reviewed following
seconded by Fiskness that the
and distributed. Upon vote the
Receipt of the following correspondence and publications
was noted:
1. Letter from Kenneth E. Yager, Mayor of the City of
Minnetonka, thanking the managers of the watershed district for
its financial participation in the acquisition of the Kelley
property in that city for public purposes.
Groundwater Data Conference
Mr. Pennie reported that he had sent correspondence to
the Presidents of metropolitan area watershed districts and
to the Minnesota Water Resources Board, the Minnesota Association
of Watershed Districts and the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources soliciting an expression of interest from those
organizations as to possible interest and willingness to parti-
cipate in a conference to discuss the topic.of groundwater in
the metropolitan area. Mr. Pennie reported that he had received
a response from Mr. Bruce Paterson, district engineer for the
Prior Lake -Spring Lake Watershed District noting that district's
interest in participating in such a conference. Mr. Gebhard
reported that the Ramsey -Washington Metro Watershed District
had also considered Mr. Pennie's inquiry and was in the process
of making a formal response. General discussion followed during
Page Four +
3/l/78
the cities are doing about cleaning the streets of winter time
deposited -materials prior to spring runoff. The matter was
tabled until the engineer had an opportunity to submit the
information he is to gather to the managers for further con-
sideration.
Treasurer's Report
The treasurer submitted his report, a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereof. Following discussion,
it was moved by Fiskness, seconded by Sault that the report be
approved and the bill be paid. Upon vote, the motion carried.
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park - City of Chanhassen
Mr. Gebhard reported that he had recently received prelim-
inary plans and specifications for development of -a large tract
of land located in the City of Chanhassen which is generally
referred to as the Chanhassen'Lakes Business Park. Mr. Gebhard
reported that a development concept plan for this general area
had been previously reviewed by the district in April of-1976
and that the board had instructed the district's engineer to
submit the preliminary comments of the district at that time to
consulting engineers to the City of Chanhassen. That letter
,..dated April 7, 1976 which outlined the district's concerns dealing
with the flood plain delineation for this area, potential encroach-
ments into the delineated flood plain of Riley Creek, setbacks and �.
dedicated greenways along Riley Creek, proposed creek crossings
of Riley Creek, and the necessity to obtain necessary permits from
the district was reviewed once again. Mr. Bill Brezinsky of
Schoell & Madson, Inc., consulting engineers to the city, was
present to review this proposed development concept. Mr. Brezinsky
noted that because of the previously expressed concerns of the
district, which Mr. Brezinsky acknowledged would most likely
still be timely today, the city is requesting and attempting
to involve the district in the early stages of this development
concept plan. General discussion followed during which the
managers reiterated the similar type concerns expressed in the
district's letter of April 7, 1976 regarding this proposed
development area. Upon inquiry of Mr. Brezinsky, the city's
consulting engineer noted that this matter is scheduled to be
presented to the Chanhassen Planning Commission on approximately
March 8th of this year and thereafter be presented to the City
Council for preliminary plan and plat approval, including rezoning
of the site at its meeting of March 14, 1978. In view of the
district's expressed concerns regarding major issues dealing with
basic policies and criteria of the watershed district and the
need to -identify and delineate the flood plain to ascertain
permitted encroachments in this area riparian to Riley Creek,
it was moved by Fiskness, seconded by Sault that the district's
Page Five
3/l/78
C�
engineer correspond immediately with the City of Chanhassen
to note the district's concerns and preliminary evaluations
of this concept plan in order that appropriate scheduling of
the entire review of this concept plan be done in an orderly
fashion to allow all necessary review and consideration of
the plan by appropriate regulatory bodies. Upon vote, the
motion carried unanimously. Mr. Gebhard was instructed to
transmit the district's response immediately to appropriate
representatives of the developer and officials of the City
of Chanhassen.
Proposed Storm Sewer Construction - Southwest Bloominqton - 1978
Mr. Gebhard reported that he had received a telephone call
from Mr. Fritz Rahr of Bloomington, Minnesota advising the
district's engineer that the Bloomington City Council had
authorized its staff to prepare plans and specifications for
construction of a city outlet for storm water discharge from
the Countryside West and West Park Hills developments in the
City of Bloomington. Mr. Gebhard reported that he has some
familiarity with the various proposed routes for several suggested
outlet systems to be designed and constructed in this area calling
for an ultimate discharge into Purgatory Creek and thereafter
into the Minnesota River. General discussion followed during
which the managers noted the necessity to review any storm
sewer system to be designed. The managers noted however, that
further consideration of this subject should await the completion
of the final detailed plans and specifications for this storm
sewer system. Mr. Gebhard was instructed to continue to
coordinate the district's review process with the City of
Bloomington for this anticipated storm sewer construction
project.
Basic Water Management Improvement Project - City of
Minnetonka - Highways 7 & 101 - Engineer's Feasability Study
Mr. Gebhard reported that he is continuing to work on his
engineer's feasability study for the basic overall water manage-
ment project -for Purgatory Creek in the Highways*7 and 101 area
in the City of Minnetonka. Mr. Bob Kruell requested that a short
summary of the basic overall management water project which the
district has under consideration be presented. Mr. Gebhard was
requested to respond which he did outlining the various facets
of the project known by the managers to date. Following Mr.
Gebhard's presentation, Mr. Kruell suggested that the managers
in evaluating the feasability of this project may wish to
consider curtailing development in this area in order to look
at .the overall impact of the project upon the public's interest
in protecting the natural resources in this area and in order
to restrict encroachments into the natural flood plain in this
w
, R crj "
COUNTY OF CARVES
CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318
February 28, 1978
Mr. Bruce Pankonen
City Planner
City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
RE: Proposed Animal Fair Development
Dear Bruce:
OFFICE OF
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
PATRICK B. MURPHY
Phone 448.3435 Ext. 29
I have reviewed the proposed plan for a new Animal Fair
facility in the southeast quadrant of CSAH 17 and T.N. 5.
It is my opinion that the driveway entrances to the property
as proposed will create future traffic congestion and safety
problems. I would suggest the following revisions be made
before final approval by the City of Chanhassen.
1. The south entrance is located at about the minimum
desirable distance from T.H. 5 for an access point.
This entrance should be re -designed to serve as the
only entrance and the principal exit. This would
permit future channelization to the north when needed.
2. The proposed north entrance should be deleted. Another
solution would be to permit a temporary exit for right
turns only designed as a free right turn lane. This
would require some rather minimal widening on CSAH
17 to tie into the existing acceleration lane on
T.H. 5. This exit should be removed when traffic
volumes warrant channelization of the T.H. 5, CSAH 17
intersection.
3. In order to provide public right-of-way for future
intersection related work, it is recommended that an
additional 17'be dedicated from T.H. 5 to the southerly
driveway and a minimum of 7'additional from the
southern driveway to the south boundary of this property.
If you have any questions, please call me. �31 a2�
S i nee r e 1.Y '�ti +*
yg7$
co
Patrick B. Murphy � Q 0jr c�
Director of Public Works � MNNs'k,
ti
PBM: kam „ ��
A
N EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER _
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE OF HEARING
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
Don Ashworth being first,duly sworn, on oath deposes
and says that he is and was on February. 21 19 78 the duly
qualified and
acting City Clerk -Administrator of the. City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said
date he caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of hearing on a
Proposed rezoning & subdivision of land for Dunn & Curry Real Estate Managementin the
City to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said
notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes
addressed to all such owners in the United States mails with postage fully prepaid
thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such
by the records of the County Treasurer of Carver County, Minnesota, and by other
appropriate records.
Subscribedoand sworn to before me
this _ day of ate,. /�-
%;� . .... ota lic
h::Y KL;NUELf;L IZ
OT NE
A, C-PRVER COUNTY
:nm'-siionn ESyx/,irves Jan.
300/,�19981
.'�.IV 'iV 'f`'JVv1A119 YVV
Don Ashworth
City Manager
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED REZONING AND SUBDIVISION OF LAND
FOR DUNN & CURRY REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT INCORPORATED, CHANHASSEN,
MINNESOTA.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City
of Chanhassen, Minnesota will meet on Wednesday, the 8th day of March,
1978 at 8:30 p.m. at the City Hall, 7610 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen,
Minnesota, for the purpose of holding a public hearing to consider
rezoning the following described property from Rl-A Agricultural
Residential District to P-4, Planned Industrial Development District
and to subdivide the property into 73 industrial lots and 7 outlots.
The proposed rezoning and subdivision of land involves the following
described parcel of land:
PARCEL A:
That part of the northwest quarter of Section 14, Township 116
Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the northerly
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad,
except that taken for Minnesota State Trunk Highway No. 5.
Subject to County Road No. 17 over the westerly 33.00 feet.
PARCEL B:
That part of the northwest quarter and of the north half of the
southwest quarter and of the southwest quarter of the northeast
quarter and of Government Lot 2, all in Section 14, Township 116,
Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at the southwest corner of said north half of the
southwest quarter; thence N 89 degrees 23'05"E, bearing assumed
along the south line of said north half of the southwest quarter,
a distance of 1089.62 feet; thence north a distance of 483.02 feet
thence N 63 degrees 26'05"E, a distance of 1118.03 feet; thence S 78
degrees 05'45"E, a distance of 640.96 feet to the westerly line
of proposed County State Aid Highway No. 17; thence N 31 degrees
10150"E, along said westerly line, a distance of 971.42 feet;
thence northeasterly and northerly, along said westerly line,
on a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of
1070.92 feet and a central angle of 34 degrees 30', a distance of
644.84 feet; thence N 3 degrees 19'10"W, along said westerly
line and tangent to the last described curve, a distance of
109.33 feet to the south line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St.
Paul and Pacific Railroad; thence westerly and southwesterly
along said south line of said railroad to the west line of
said north half of the southwest quarter; thence S 2 degrees
11'101"E, along said west line of said north half of the
southwest quarter to the point of beginning.
EXCEPT: Part of the north half of the southwest quarter of
Section 14, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minn.,
described as follows: Beginning at a point on the west line
of said north half of the southwest quarter, 821.90 feet,
measured along said west line, southerly of the northwest
corner of said north half of the southwest quarter, said west
line assumed to bear S 2 degrees ll'Ol"E; thence N 87 degrees
48'59"E, a distance of 550.00 feet; thence N 2 degrees 11'O1"W,
parallel with said west line, a distance of 180.00 feet; thence
N 32 degrees 05105"W, a distance of 662.31 feet to the south-
easterly right of way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul
and Pacific Railroad, as recorded in Book 23 of Deeds, Page 266;
thence S 55 degrees 32'41"W, along said southeasterly right of
way line, a distance of 260.00 feet to said west line of the
north half of the southwest quarter; thence S 2 degrees ll'Ol"E,
along said west line, a distance of 615.32 feet to the point of
beginning. And also except that part of the said N'-SW4 lying
northwest of said railroad right of way.
Subject to existing County Road No. 17 in the westerly portion
of said north half of the southwest quarter.
PARCEL C:
That part of Government Lot 1, Section 13, Township 116, Range
23, and of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter,
Section 14, Township 116, Range 23, and of Government Lot 1,
said section 14 and of the northeast quarter of the northeast
quarter of said Section 14, lying southerly of the south line
of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad, lying
south of that part of State Trunk Highway No. 5 which lies
southeasterly of said railroad and lying easterly of the easterly
line of proposed County State Aid Highway No. 17, said easterly
line being described as follows and hereinafter called Line "A":
A line parallel with and 75.00 feet easterly of, as measured
perpendicular to, the following described line: Commencing at
the southeast corner of the east half of the southwest quarter
of said Section 14; thence on an assumed bearing of S 89 degrees
25116"W, along the south line of said east half of the southwest
quarter, a distance of 145.00 feet, to the beginning of the line
to be described; thence N 0 degrees 19110"W, a distance of 1408.48
feet, thence northerly and northeasterly, a distance of 630.00
feet, along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius
of 1145.92 feet and a central angle of 31 degrees 30'00"; thence
N 31 degrees 10'50"E, tangent to said curve, a distance of
1110.25 feet; thence northeasterly and northerly, a distance
of 690.00 feet, along a tangential curve concave to the west
having a radius of 1145.92 feet and a central angle of 34 degrees
30'00"; thence N 3 degrees 19'10"W, tangent to the last described
curve, a distance of 783.95 feet and there terminating.
Except from the above described tract, that part conveyed to
the Minnesota south district of the Lutheran Church -Missouri
Synod by deed filed in Book 87 of Deeds, page 439, Carver County.
Together with that part of Government Lot 2, said Section 14,
lying easterly of the easterly line of proposed County State
Aid Highway No. 17, said easterly line being line "A" as
previously described and lying northerly of the following
described line:
Commencing at the southwest corner of the north half of the
southwest quarter of said Section 14, thence N 89 degrees
23'05"E, bearing assumed along the south line of said north
half of the southwest quarter, a distance of 1089.62 feet;
thence north a distance of 483.02 feet; thence N 63 degrees
26105"E, a distance of_1118.03 feet; thence S 78 degrees
05145"E, a distance of 799.88 feet to the point of beginning
of the line to be described; thence continue S 78 degrees
05145"E, a distance of 145.45 feet; thence N 53 degrees 14'08"E,
a distance of 543.00 feet; thence S 81 degrees 03'21"E, a
distance of 836.00 feet to the shore line of Lake Susan; thence
easterly along the northerly shore line of said Lake Susan to
the east line of said government Lot 2 and there terminating.
A plan showing said proposed rezoning and subdivision is
available for inspection at the City Hall.
All persons interested may appear and be heard at said time and
place.
Dated: February 9, 1978
BY ORDER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
(Publish in the Carver County Herald on February 22, 1978)
Victor Schmieg Strong -Towle Inc. LAKE SUSAN HILLS
Box 1402 320 Midland Bank Building
Hacken4gck., WN 55435 Mi.nne4polis, 55401
Lutheran Church of the
Living Christ
Highway 5
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Char Lynn Foundation
Box 299
Excelsior, MN 55331
Martin Ward
Box 213
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Keith Bartz
8411 Great Plains Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
George Shorba Jr.
304 Chan View
Chanhassen, MN 55317
W. W. Klein
8405 Great Plains Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Al H. Klingelhutz
8601 Great Plains Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Robert Bach
8404 Great Plains Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Donald Gale
8402 Great Plains Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Wilmer Molnau
Rt. 5
8541 Audubon Road
Excelsior, MN 55331
Minnesota Gas Company
733 Marquette Ave..
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Jonathan Development Corp
Jonathan Village Center
Chaska, MN 55318
Anna Welter
1891 Arboretum Blvd.
Excelsior, MN 55331
W.H. Trute
1450 Arboretum Blvd.
Excelsior, DIN 55331
Joseph P. Kerber
7241 Powers BLvd.
Excelsior, MN 55331
Leander Kerber
1620 Arboretum Blvd.
Excelsior, MN 55331
John Welter
9944 Harriett Ave.
Bloomington, MN 55420
lst National Bank
West Chicago
101 Main Street
West Chicago, Ill.
of
60185
Robert Armstrong Mr. Richard Lyman
8400 Great Plains Blvd. 841 Oriole Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska, MN 55318
Planning Commission -Meeting February 8, 1978 -4-
Bill Brezinsky gave a report. The developer h,P4 provided for 60 foot
rights -of -way for the three proposed streets. City ordinance calls
for 50 feet. This additional 30 feet could be added to the lots along
County Road 17 for screening and buffering purposes. without disrupting
the interior design. The Engineer feels that the intersection of
Carver Beach Road and Penamint is not dangerous as it is at the top
of a hill and would allow good sight distance.
Hud Hollenback moved"to"hold a public hearing on the proposed rezoning
and subdivision of'Carver's Point on March 8,'1978, at 7:45 p.m.' Motion
seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved.
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN - CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK: Ed Dunn,
Rod Hardy, Jim Hill, Stelios Aslanidis,Joe Betz, Tom Klingelhutz, John.
Peters, and Shirley. Clasen were present. The applicant is proposing to
rezone property south of Highway 5 and east of County 'Road 17 from R-lA
to P-4-and subdivide into numerous industrial lots.
The City Planner gave his report. The adopted city plan as amended
in 1976 indicates this area to be planned industrial development.
Local access to this property will be via new County Road 17 and a
detached frontage road commencing at new County`Road 17 and terminating
at 184th Street on the east end of the city. County Road 17 will
be built by the county in 1979. The City Council, on February 6, 1978,
ordered a public improvement hearing to consider bringing trunk sewer
and water to the -property. The Planner suggested that the Carver -
County Director of Public Works should approve all the intersections
with the county road'for sight distance. A linear open space corridor
should be'preserved for future -development along the entire length
of the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor sewer. 'The proposal provides
for access to the Lutheran Church of the Living Christ from the
frontage road which will provide better access than the present road
on State Highway 5. The Planner recommended the Planning Commission
order a public hearing on the proposal.
The plans have been submitted to the watershed district for their
recommendations and comments.
Jerry Neher moved to hold a public hearing to consider rezoning and
subdivision for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park on March 8, 1978, at
8:30.p.m. Motion seconded -by Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved.
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN - MTS SYSTEM CORPORATION: MTS is
proposing to construct a 160,000 square foot manufacturing/office
facility along 'the south side of Highway 5 in Hennepin County.
The Planning Commission should consider amending the present approved
PUD to allow this use.
Dick Mat ''thews moved to hold a public hearing to consider amending
the PUD agreement with Ken Beiersdorf on March 8, 1978, at 9:30 p.m.
Motion seconded by Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved.
COUNCIL MINUTES: Hud Hollenback moved to note the January 23, 1978,
Council minutes. Motion seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved-.
CITY OF
�eg�
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O BOX 1476CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
February 7, 1978
Mr. John Rutford
Metropolitan Council Referals Coordinator
300 Metro Square Building
7th and Robert Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
Re: Metropolitan Council Referal File 5440
Dear John:
In response to Metropolitan Council staff requests, Chanhassen
respectfully requests not to proceed with Metro Council Referal
File 5440. Said referal file was initiated by the City of
Chanhassen out of misunderstanding of the review process.
Kindly return all documents regarding said referal file to
my attention.
Very trulyZL
Bruce Pankonin
City Planner
BP : k
f
LARSON & MERTZ
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
RUSSELL H. LARSON MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
CRAIG M. MERTZ
OF COUNSEL February 6, 1978
HARVEY E. SKAAR
MARK C. MCCULLOUGH
Mr. Rodney D. Hardy
Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.
4940 Viking Drive
Minneapolis, MN 55435
Dear Rod:
Re: MSAS 101
TELEPHONE
(612) 33S-9565
As you are aware, the engineers have revised the right-of-way
easement across the Dunn & Curry property east of County- Road
17, which revision was worked out between you and Bill Brezinsky.
As it appears that all things are now in order, I see no reason
why we cannot conclude this easement acquisition, and to this end,
I have enclosed the original and one copy of the easement document,
to which has been attached the revised description as 'Exhibit A,
If you find that the document now meets your approval, please
arrange to have the appropriate officers of Dunn & Curry Real Estate
Management, Inc. execute the easement, returning the original to
me along with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title which, as
you know, I must surrender to the Registrar so the easement can be
memorialized on the certificate. The Owner's Duplicate will be
returned to you when this has been completed.
When the signed easement is returned to this office, T will arrange
to secure from the City Treasurer the payment of $45,600.00, which
is the agreed sale price of this easement and our appraiser's valua-
tion of the same. It will be necessary that we join Northwestern
National Bank of Hopkins on the check, as itis the mortgagee of this
property, and we will need to have it execute a mortgagee's consent
to the easement. This can be arranged once you have returned the
easement to this office.
RHL ; mep
Encls.
cc.; Donald W. Ashworth
Very truly yours,
RUSSELL H, LARSON
Chanhassen City Attorney
(RECEIVEW
78 OF,iSFN,I
.---N
Corp. R/W
EASEMENT
THIS INSTRUMENT, Made this _ _ day of _ February _, 19 78 ,
by and between DUNN & CURRY REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT, INC. ,
a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State
of Minnesota , party of the first part, and the City of
Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, party of the second
part;
WITNESSETH: That the said party of the first part, in consideration
of One Dollar and other good and valuable consideration to it in
hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof
is hereby acknowledged, does hereby Grant, Bargain, Sell, Convey and
Warrant to said party of the second part, its successors and assigns,
the perpetual right and easement to construct, maintain, operate and
repair public rights of way, street and utilities,
over, under and across the premises
described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof,
together with whatever temporary easements are therein described,
and together with a perpetual easement for ingress and egress.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has caused
these presents to be duly executed as of the day and year first above
written.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was
day of February 19 78 ,
and by
DUNN & CURRY REAL ESTATE
MANAGEMENT, INC.
By
Its
And
Its
acknowledged before me this
by
of_DUNN & CURRY REAL ESTATE
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER
ENGINEERS 6 SURVEYORS
MINN. NO. 2265
SO. OAK. 755
SO NINTH AVENUE SOUTH
WIS. NO. E-6176
HOPKINS. MINNESOTA 55343
FLORIDA NO. 6271
PHONE 938-7601
NO. DAK. 623
MONT. NO. IB16-E
IOWA NO. 5923
DESCRIPTION
TEXAS NO. 35659
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
FOPS
ORDER NO__ 8379_—._-__
CARLISLE MADSON
REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR
MINNESOTA STATE AID STREET NO. 101 RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENTS
MINN. NO. 4374
SO. OAK. 791
WIS.'NO. S-674
IOWA NO. 3705
NO. OAK. 1103
MONT. NO. 1742-S
Revised
8) A 100.00 foot easement for public right-of-way purposes over, under
1-9-78
and across the following described property:
N 1/2, Sec. 11
That part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 116 North,
N 1/2, Sec. 12
Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as follows:
S 1/2, Sec. 2
Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 2222, CARVER -BEACH,
Torrens
according to the recorded plat thereof; thence southerly along
Ctf. No.
the west line of said Lot 2222 to the southwest corner thereof;
7001
thence easterly along the south lines of Lots 2222 and 2223 in
said plat to the northwest corner of Lot 2259 in said plat;
thence southerly along the west line of said Lot 2259 and its
southerly extension to the center line of Forest Road as
dedicated in said plat of CARVER -BEACH; thence easterly
along said center line to the westerly line of Highland Drive
(now known as Nez Perce) as dedicated in said plat; thence
southerly along said westerly line and the same extended
southerly to the center line of Dogwood Road as shown on said
plat of.CARVER-BEACH; thence westerly along the center line of
said Dogwood Road to the east line of Excelsior Road (now
known as C.S.A.H. No. 17) as dedicated in said plat; thence
northerly along said east line to the south line of Grove Road
(now know as West 68th Street) as dedicated in said plat; thence
easterly along the south line of said Grove Road to the point
of beginning.
That part of Government Lot 8 in Section 1, that part of the
Southeast Quarter in Section 2, that part of the Northeast Quarter
in Section 11, and that part of the Northwest Quarter of the North-
west Quarter of Section 12,'all in Township 116 North, Range 23
West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as follows:
Beginning at the point of intersection of the center line of
Dogwood Road, as shown on the recorded plat of CARVER -BEACH,
with the southerly extension of the easterly line of Highland
Drive (now known as Nez Perce) as dedicated in said plat;
thence southerly along the southerly extension of the easterly
line.of said Highland Drive to the south line of said Dogwood.
Road; thence continuing southerly along the southerly extension
of the easterly line of said Highland Drive a distance of 170.34
feet; thence easterly parallel with the southerly line of said
Dogwood Road a distance of 145.41 feet; thence northerly a
distance of 170.05 feet to a point on the southerly line of
said Dogwood Road distant 135.41 feet easterly from the
(Continued) Page 8-a
ORDER NO.-_ 8379
WILLIAM 0. SCHOELL
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER
MINN. NO. 2265
SO. DAK. 755
WIS. NO. E-6176
FLORIDA NO. 627'
NO. OAK. 623
MONT. NO. 1S16-E
IOWA NO. 5923
TEXAS NO. 3S659
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS
50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH
HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
PHONE 938-7801
DESCRIPTION
CARLISLE MADSON
REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
FOAs
MINNESOTA STATE AID STREET NO. 101 RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENTS
MINN. NO. 4374
SO. OAK. 791
WIS. NO. S-674
IOWA NO. 3705
NO. DAK. 1109
MONT. NO. 1742-S
Revised
8) (Continued)
1-9-78 .
intersection of said southerly line with the southerly extension
N 112, Sec. 11
of the easterly line of said Highland Drive; thence continuing
N 112, Sec. 12
northerly along an extension of the last described course to
S 112, Sec. 2
the center line of said Dogwood Road; thence easterly along
said center line to the intersection with the southerly extension
Torrens
of the westerly line of Lakeview Drive (now known as Kiowa Avenue)
Ctf. No.
as dedicated in said plat; thence southerly along the southerly
7001
extension of said Lakeview Drive to the southerly line of said
Dogwood Road; thence continuing southerly along the southerly
extension of the westerly line of said Lakeview Drive a distance
of 260 feet; thence South l degree 28 minutes 40 seconds West
(assuming the west line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12
has a bearing of North 1 degree 03 minutes 50 seconds East) a
distance of 380.14 feet to the intersection with a line bearing
South 88 degrees 38 minutes 37 seconds East from a judicial
landmark on. the west line of the Northwest Quarter of said
Section 12, distant 824.18 feet southerly from the northwest
corner of said Section 12;.thence North 88 degrees 38 minutes
37 seconds West a distance of 1286.60 feet to said judicial
landmark on the west line of the Northwest Quarter of said
Section 12; thence South 1 degree 03 minutes 50 seconds West
along the west line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12
a distance of 501.07 feet to the southeast corner of the North
Half of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 11; thence westerly
along the south line of the North Half of the Northeast Quarter
of said Section 11 to the center line of County State Aid
Highway No. 17; thence northerly along the center line of said
highway to the southeast corner of GREENWOOD SHORES, according
to the recorded plat thereof; thence northerly along the
easterly line of said GREENWOOD SHORES to the south line of
the Southeast Quarter of said Section 2; thence westerly along
the south line of the Southeast Quarter.of said Section 2 to
the easterly line of said GREENWOOD SHORES; thence northerly
along the easterly line of said GREENWOOD SHORES to the inter-
section with the westerly extension o the center line of
Dogwood Road as shown on the recorded plat of CARVER BEACH;
thence easterly along said center line extended and the center
line of said Dogwood Road to the point of beginning.
The center line of said easement is described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast corner of the Northeast Quarter of said
Section 11; thence on an assumed bearing of North 1 degree 33 minutes
(Continued)
Page a-b .
ORDER No._ 8379.___
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL SCHOELL & MADISON, INC. CARLISLE MADSON
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR
MINN. NO. 2265 ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS MINN. NO. 4374
SO. DAK. 755 SO NINTH AVENUE SOUTH SO. DAK. 791
wls. NO. E-6176 HOPKINS. MINNESOTA 55343 WIS. NO. 5-674 '
FLORIOA NO. 6271 PHONE 938-7601 IOWA NO. 3705
NO. OAK. 623 NO. DAK. 1105
MONT. NO. 1S16-E MONT. NO. 7742-S
IOWA NO. 5923 DESCRIPTION
TEXAS NO. 35659
Popes CITY OF CHANHASSEN
MINNESOTA STATE AID STREET NO. 101 RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENTS
Revised
8) (Continued)
1-9-78
00 seconds East, along the east line of said Northeast Quarter, a
N 1/2, Sec. 11
distance of 817.46 feet, to the beginning of the center line to be
N 1/2, Sec. 12
described; thence continuing North 1 degree 33 minutes 00 seconds
S 1/2, Sec. 2
East a distance of 770.75 feet; thence northerly and northwesterly .
a distance of 411.48 feet, along a tangential curve concave to the
Torrens
southwest having a radius of 747.33 feet and a central angle of
Ctf. No.
31 degrees 32 minutes 50 seconds; thence North 29 degrees 59 minutes
7001
50 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 962.29 feet;
thence northwesterly and westerly a distance of 549.10 feet, along
a tangential curve concave to the southwest having a radius of
548.82 feet and a central angle of 57 degrees 19 minutes 27 seconds;
thence North 87 degrees 19 minutes 17 seconds West, tangent to the
last described curve, a distance of 1131.09 feet and said center line
there terminating.
Together with a 60.00 foot easement for slope purposes over, under and
across the above described property. Said easement being 60.00 feet to
the left of a line described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast corner of the Northeast Quarter of said
Section 11; thence on an assumed bearing of North 1 degree 33 minutes
00 seconds East, along the east line of said Northeast Quarter, a
distance of 1388.21 feet, to the beginning of the line to be described;
thence continuing North 1 degree 33 minutes 00 seconds East a distance
of 100.00 feet and said line there terminating.
Together with a 60.00 foot easement for slope purposes over, under and
across the above described property. Said easement being 60.00 feet to the
left of a line described as follows:
Commencing at the terminus of the above described line; thence
North l degree 33 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 100.00
feet, to the beginning of the line to be described; thence
northerly, along a tangential curve concave to the southwest
having a radius of 747.33 feet, a central angle of 31 degrees
32 minutes 50 seconds and a total length of 411.48 feet, a
distance of 100.00 feet and said line there terminating.
Page 8 -,c. r
9 p
CITY OF -
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP0 BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Manager, Don Ashworth
DATE: February 6, 1978
SUBJ: Planned Industrial Development - Lake Susan Hills - Accept
Feasibility Report and Set Public Improvement Hearing Date
Council acceptance of the engineer's feasibility study and setting
the date for a public improvement hearing are the two basic issues
to be considered by the city council. However, involved in these
two are several other issues:
1). Acceptance of Feasibility Study:
Attached please find a summation of the engineer's
feasibility report. The feasibility study was presented
in September, but action delayed to. insure that the
council would be in a position, at a potential future
public hearing, to state that the proposed improvement
was in accordance with Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission (MWCC) policy and that decisions relative
to new County 17 were completed (See Manager's report
of September 19, 1977). During the past several months
staff has been working with MWCC and the County to insure
that these decisions were known and results incorporated
into the final feasibility study. In addition, the
major developer, affected by the improvement,has been
working with the Planning Commission in platting and
rezoning of their property to a planned industrial use.
At the present time, Dunn and Curry are not allowed,
by ci tY ;,rusrancco, , o go paw a sketch plan agc
without public improvements being available or eminent.
The engineer's recommended public improvements, coordination
of County 17 into such, and the decision of the MWCC will
be further discussed by the engineer in his presentation
of the project to the council.
2). Set Date of Public Improvement Hearing Under Special
Assessment Procedures:
r.,
Mayor and Council
-2-
February 6 ,. ,19 7 8
Several "Catch 22" situations have arisen in council
consideration and private development of this general
area in the past several years, i.e. the existing plan
for Chanhassen shows this area. as being industrial in
nature and such is in conformance with our guide plan.
However, without having a specific development request,
the city has been unable to get a decision from the
MICC or to consider public improvements without reasonable
assurance of protecting the public interest. Dunn and
Curry have additionally faced a chicken and egg question
in attempting to provide public improvements to their
property.when the beginning/terminus of public improvements
occurs on property not under their control. For these
reasons, Dunn and Curry requested that the city council
order a feasibility study to consider installing these
improvements as a public improvement project under the
special assessment procedures of Chapter 429. As noted
in 1)., above, the feasibility study has been completed
and potential problems concerning MWCC and County 17 now
appear to be resolved. Additionally, planning commission
review of developer plans to date have been favorable and,
again, such is in conformance with overall development
plans of the city. However, the issue of reasonably
assuring that the project is not a financial burden to
the general public has yet to be resolved. Council ordering
of the project without knowledge that the planning
commission and council will approve development plans
could present a severe financial burden to the general
public. On the other side of the coin, without public
improvements being eminent, the developer cannot proceed
beyond a sketch plan stage.
This office would recommend that the following schedule be considered
to alleviate the above concerns:
February 6, 1978 City Council consideration of
accepting feasibility study and
setting public improvement
hearing under special assessment
procedures.
February 8, 1978 Planning Commission considers
ordering public hearing for pre-
liminary plat and rezoning.
March 8, 1978 Planning Commission public hearing.
March 13, 1978 Public Hearing to consider ordering
public improvements under special
assessment procedure (final decision
delayed for one week to receive
written testimony and review public
presentations).
Mayor and Council -3-
February- 6, 1978
March 20, 1978 City Council Action to:
1). Order public improvements including
acquisition of right-of-way and
preparation of plans and specifica-
tions,
2). Rezone property to PID,
3). Approve development plan and
development contract.
Should the city council approve the above concept, the council could
be assured that the decision to consider specific development plans and
the decision to consider ordering the public improvements occurred at
the same time. Should the development review process be delayed, the
public improvement process would additionally be delayed (or vice
versa) until such time as they could both be considered simultaneously.
To allow the process to proceed as shown, the council should instruct
the planning commission to proceed with their review, but any decision
or recommendation made would be contingent upon the council ordering
the public improvement project.
This office believes that the proposed timing schedule is feasible
and does provide the city with reasonable assurances of specific
development approvals paralleling public improvement decisions.
In addition, this office is concerned that even if development plans
are approved and public improvements completed that.the city is not
assured that the development will be financially feasible and, as such,
that special assessments would be paid. To assure that this did
not occur, this office would recommend that Dunn and Curry provide
financial securities sufficient to pay any or all special assessments
within the project area not paid during any five year period over which
the public improvements were financed. The developer has agreed to
this condition and should the city council act to accept the feasibility
report and set the.date of the public hearing, as .outlined above,
staff will begin preparation of a financial security agreement to be
completed prior to final approvals. Several "what ifs" will have to
be considered in the security agreement, i.e. MWCC potential future
purchase of interceptor sewer, development sites sold and construction
occurring,. etc. However, with the help of the city attorney, a workable
agreement can be prepared for council consideration if the concept
presented above is approved.
Staff would recommend that the city council formally accept the
feasibility report of the city engineer with the recommended improvements
shown and set a date of a public hearing for March 13, 1978.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 3, 1978
TO: Planning Commission, Staff, Rod Hardy and Stelios Aslinidis
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJ: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Planned Industrial Development (PID)
APPLICANT: Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.
PLANNING CASE: P-054
ORDINANCE REF: City Ordinance 47, Section 17.
The following enclosures are submitted in support of the proposed
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park:
Enclosure:
1.
Application for
consideration
of planning request.
2.
Chanhassen Lakes
Business
Park
Fact Sheet.
3.
Chanhassen Lakes
Business
Park
Acreage Breakdown.
4.
Metro Setting.
5.
Surrounding Land
Uses.
6.
Chanhassen Lakes
Business
Park
Preliminary Plat
7.
Chanhassen Lakes
Business
Park
Proposed Time Phases.
8.
Chanhassen Lakes
Business
Park
Proposed Utilities.
9.
Chanhassen Lakes
Business
Park
Trees and Drainage.
10.
Chanhassen Lakes,.Business
Park
Existing Slopes.
11.
Riley -Purgatory
Creek Watershed District Letter dated April 7, 1976.
12.
City engineer's
report dated January 30, 1978.
Planning Commissio., -2- February. 3, 1978
i
13. Richard Dougherty's report dated January 23, 1978.
14. Building Inspector's report dated January 31, 1978.
15. Fire Marshal's report dated January 31, 1978.
16. City Planner's report dated February 3, 1978,(to be delivered
under separate cover).
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE&P 0 BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINN ESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: February 2, 1978
TO: Planning Commission, Staff, Stelios Aslanidis and Rod Hardy
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJ: Preliminary Development Plan Review for Chanhassen Lakes
Business Park, Planned Industrial Development (PID)
APPLICANT: Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.
PLANNING CASE: P-054.
ORDINANCE REF: Chanhassen City Ordinance 47, Section 17
Petition
As shown in attached enclosures 1 - 11, the applicant, Dunn and Curry
Real Estate Management, Inc., is proposing to rezone the subject
property to P-4, Planned Industrial Development District (PID) and
subdivide the subject property into numerous industrial parcels.
Background
1. As shown in enclosure 3, the subject property contains 276.5+
acres of gross land area located south of Highway 5, east of County
Road 17 and generally north of Lake Susan.
2. Existing Zoning: The subject property and environs is presently
zoned R-lA, Agricultural Residence District.
3. Comprehensive Plan Proposal:
a. Land Use: Pursuant to the adopted City Plan, as amended,
the future identity of the subject property should be an industrial
park.
b. Traffic Circulation: Pursuant to the adopted City Plan and
Carver County Transportation System, local access to the subject
property will be via new County Road 17 and a detached frontage road
commencing at new County Road 17 and terminating at existing STH 101.
Local roads are proposed to radiate off of existing County Road 17,
new County Road 17 and the proposed detached frontage road.
• Planning Commissio. -2- February 2, 1978
C. Metropolitan Council Action: The Metropolitan Council in
October, 1976, recognized and approved Chanhassen's plan amendment
which indicated the subject property should assume an industrial
identity.
d. Open Space Plans: Pursuant to Chanhassen's Open Space Plan
a linear open space corridor is proposed for the north shore of Lake
Susan.and a drainage tributary of Riley Creek: This area is also
the proposed location of the Lake Ann Interceptor sewer.
e. Utility Plan: As shown in the City Engineer's report,
enclosure 12, the City will have to brine trunk sewer service to the
subject property. The City Council on Monday, February 6, 1978,
ordered a public improvement hearing to consider bringing trunk sewer
and water to the subject property.
5. Physiographic Analysis of the Subject Property.
Soil and Landscape Analysis: According to the Carver County
Soil Survey, Chanhassen's future industrial area contains upland and
clay loams with 0 - 40% slope, poorly drained depressional soils and
peat and marsh areas.
a. Analysis of Upland Loams and Clay Loam; This soils group
consists of predominately well and mildly well drained silty and loamy
soils ranging in slope from zero to 40%. The following soil characteris-
tics are common in this area:
1). Seasonal high water table is usually below five feet;
however, it is a depth of three to five feet and
moderately well drained soil.
2). Permeability is moderately rapid.
3). Bearing strength is fair.
4). Shrink -swell potential is low to moderate.
5). Potential frost heave action is moderate to high.
6). Limitations of specific uses:
(a) Foundations - moderate.
(b) Local Roads and Streets - moderate.
(c) Excavation - slight to moderate.
(d) Lawns and Gardens - slight.
(e) Dwellings with Basements - moderate.
(f) Septic Filter Systems - slight to moderate.
Soils having slope from zero to 12% can and have been used successfully
for community development with a few precautionary steps. The hazard
of soil erosion, sediment deposition and cost of planning and construction
are related to the steepness and length of slope. Foundations and
roads are subject to structural damage due to frost action or soil
shrink -swell. Footing drains are needed in some areas to control
seepage of water into the basin. Soil absorption systems usually
function; however, perculation tests are needed to determine areas
needed for a filter field. The soils absorption system may not function
properly for short periods in moderately well -drained soils due to
high seasonal water table. The hazardous side hill effluent seepage
is very severe on slopes over 12%. A few soils with sandy surface
layers are more droughty and difficult to vegetate.
• Planning Commissioi. -3- February 2, 1978
b. Analysis of Poorly Drained Depressional Soils: This group
consists of somewhat poor and poorly drained soils. Soil properties for
this group cover quite a range, but the following soil characteristics
are common:
1). Seasonal high water table is at a depth of 1 to 4 feet.
2). Permeability ranges of slow to rapid.
3). Bearing strength is fair to poor.
4). Shear strength is fair to poor..
5). Shrink -swell potential is mostly moderate to high.
6). Potential frost action is high.
7). Slope range from zero to 6%.
8). Limitation for specific uses:
(a) Foundations - moderate to severe.
(b) Local Roads and Streets - severe.
(c) Excavation - severe.
(d) Lawns and Gardens - slight.
(e) Dwellings with Basements - severe.
(f) Septic Filter Field - Severe.
These soils are severely limited as locations for residential or
commercial development due to the poor drainage and seasonal high
water table. Even with proper design and engineering to overcome the
limitations, the maintenance and upkeep of parking lots, roads, utilities,
etc. can be quite expensive due to the wetness and structural damage
by front action. Soils absorption systems cannot function properly
and would pollute the underground water. Many of these soils could
be used for parks, open space or retained for crop land.
C. Analysis of Marsh and Peat Areas: This soils group consists
of very poorly drained, deep organic soils. The following soil
characteristics are common to this group:
1). Seasonal high water table is usually at the surface.
2). Permeability has a wide range.
3). Bearing strength is generally very poor.
4). Shear strength is generally very poor.
5). Potential frost action is high.
6). Slopes are nearly level.
7). Limitations for specific uses: These soils are very
severely limited to all kinds of development due to the
high water table and very poor strength of organic materials.
Sdils in this gruop also have low bulk densities and are very
compressible and in general have undesireable construction
characteristics.
6. Staff Comments
a. City Engineer's comments: Reference enclosure 12.
b. Building Inspector's comments: Reference enclosure 14.
C. Fire Marshal's comments: Reference enclosure 15.
d. Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed Board of Manager's Comments:
Reference enclosure 11.
• Planning Commissioi -4- February 2, 1978.
Planner's Comments
1. As you know, the Metropolitan Council and the Chanhassen City
Council jointly agreed the area north and northwest of Lake Susan should
be industrial. At the time of plan adoption, Chanhassen recognized
the vast majority of this area did not fall within in the "typical"
definition of industrial property. Specifically, Chanhassen's industrial
area has too many natural amenities, (views and vistas), significant
stands of trees and many other natural amenities. Recognizing these
facts, the Chanhassen City Council knew that Chanhassen would not
absorb the typical industrial users of property. But rather Chanhassen's
industrial system would be absorbed similar to Jonathan's industrial
areas and the industrial areas anticipated and under development for
Opus II in Minnetonka.
2. I am in total agreement and endorse the comments made by the
city engineer.
3. In block 11, (north of Lake Susan) the "no build line" should be
defined and said no build line should become the rear lot line of
the lots proposed to occupy block 11.
4. The alignment of proposed County Road 17 is not in accordance with
the location as called for Carver County. A minor shifting of this
roadway will be necessary in the area of block 8.
5. Carver County Director of Public Works should approve the intersection
location of all proposed minor streets with County roads.
6. A linear open space corridor should be preserved for future
development along the entire length of the proposed Lake Ann Trunk/
Interceptor sewer. This open space corridor would require some
redesign of lots in blocks 1 and 4.
7. The time phasing sequence, as shown in enclosure 7, appears to
be consistent with Chanhassen's ability to absorb new industrial uses
of land. Parenthetically, it is the feeling of this planner that all
improvements (sewer, water and local streets) should conform with
this time phasing sequence.
8. Ingress and egress to the existing church (block 9) should be
removed from Highway 5 and should share the joint access road anticipated
for lots 1 and 2, block 9.
9. In a nut shell, Dunn and Curry's plan looks great.
Planner's Recommendation
I recommend the city Planning Commission look favorably on Dunn and
Curry's request and order a public hearing to be held on March 8,
1978, at 8:30 p.m.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
January 31,
Mr. Rod Hardy
Dunn and Curry
4940 Viking Drive
Pentagon Office Park
Minneapolis, MN 55435
Dear Rod:
As you remember at our last meeting, I spoke briefly about the
possibility of obtaining monies on a cost sharing basis through the
State of Minnesota Soil and Water Conservation Board to write down
the costs of design and construction for proper soil and water
conservation practices in areas undergoing land use change. Last
week I received an information package regarding this program and
am now forwarding a copy to you for your review. Although the City
of Chanhassen would not be a sponsor in this program, it is our position
to strongly encourage installation of structures and landscaping
designed to diminish erosion and lake degradation. This position
is primarily based upon problems that have arisen from urbanization
along West Lotus Lake without consideration for storm water runoff.
Throughout my correspondence and inquiries concerning this program,
I have received indications that new developments in the West Lotus
Lake area meet most of the criteria upon which an application would
be judged. In addition, if much of the preliminary information and
data are gathered and organized at this time, it would greatly help
to satisfy Section S.W.C. 2(B)2, wherein it is stated, "The State
Board will accept applications until April 1, 1973, and shall give
preference to early applications." I feel that this program could be
s.�-gnificantly amenable to your needs and intentions as a developer and
also to those of the City of Chanhassen.
If you have any gliestions or comments, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
Bob Waibel
Assistant City Planner
cc: Stelios Aslinidis
BW:k
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 31, 1978
TO: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
FROM: Jerry Schlenk, Building Inspector
SUBJ: Lake Susan Hills
Where is the water coming from? Is that a dead end abutting
Martin Ward Property? If so, should not be allowed. What
size service going into lots? What happened to church drive-
way, will you be allowed to build over lot lines, public
access to Lake Susan? Lot 2 Block 8 shows no water service,
dead end water main in Block 1.
448 -2111
i tlPtr~ r3 EMERGENCY PHONE
; �,,; y- •� � u�. G. fit_ •
-.�-= Chanhassen Fire Department
P. O. BOX 97 • 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • CHANHASSEN, MINNE80TA 55317 • BUS. PHONE 04.9191
i
January 31, 1978
TO: Bruce Pankonin and Planning Commission
FROM: Mark Littfin, Bureau of Fire Prevention
James R. Hill, Inc.
1. The street Santee Lane sounds similiar to Shawnee anlq e
which are existing 5 in Chanhassen. Some on could
result in communication dis= ' h' ifferent names.
2. The intersect' arver Beach Road and P t Lane could
be ous intersection in that the two could be hill.
SUBJECT: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park
1. Will there be a watermain and fire hydrants located on the church
property for fire protection?
2. Where will the driveway be to get to the church property?
3. Will the 12" watermain be looped to the system by the Standard
Service Station or Chanhassen Estates to eliminate a dead end?
BJECT: Minnewashta Creek
1. No. nough information.
2. Traffic 0.`ng out of Minnewashta Creek Development should .t enter
onto State Hi, ay 7.
SUBJECT: Office Building-o-;,Ld Feed Mill Site
1. Not enough information.
SUBJECT: MTS
1. :e,--
hat is the size the watermain going to the ilding for fire
rotection a is the system going to be looped?
2.ill I ere be a secondary access road to the plant off . _ ,';way 5 for
gency vehicles in case the main entrance is inaccessibl_
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL
CARLISLE MADSON
JACK T. VOSLER
JAMES R. ORR
HAROLD E. DAHLIN
LARRY L. HANSON
RAYMOND J. JACKSON
WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY
JACK E. GILL
RODNEY B. GOROON
THEODORE D. KEMNA
JOHN W. EMOND
KENNETH E. ADOLF
WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT'
BRUCE C. SUNDING
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS
B-7601 • .50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
OFFICES AT HURON. SOUTH OAKOTA ANO DENTON. TEXAS
City of Chanhassen
c/o Mr. Don Ashworth, City Manager
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Attention: Mr. Bruce Pankonin
Subject:
Gentlemen:
January 30, 1978
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park - Lake
Susan Hills Development.
We have reviewed the preliminary plat plans for the subject development
as prepared by Urbanscope, and dated January 23, 1978.
STREETS:
Primary access to the development will be provided by new C.S.A.H. No. 17,
bisecting the property in a north -south direction and scheduled for completion
in 1980.
Secondary access to Phase I will be provided by extension of the east -west
street to State Highway 101 to the east. At Highway 101, the street should be
aligned with the proposed south frontage road.. Consideration may be given to
Municipal State Aid designation of this street after completion of the traffic
study being completed by Bather, Ringrose, Wolsfeld; and a 100 foot right-of-way
should be provided to accommodate this possibility.
Phases II and III will have secondary access from existing County Road 17
as indicated on the plans. Alignment of the Phase III street with the Phase I
street is impossible because of topography.
The plans provide an 80 foot right-of-way for all streets other than
C.S.A.H. 17 and the east -west Phase I street as required by ordinance. The
minimum 60 foot Cul-de-Sac right-of-ways are in accordance with City Standards.
The longest Cul-de-Sac is an allowable 500 feet long..
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
City of Chanhassen January 30, 1978
c/o Mr. Don Ashworth, City Manager
Attention: Mr. Bruce Pankonin
Page 2
Street grades (not shown) should be a minimum of one-half and a maximum
of seven percent.
A minimum gutter to gutter street width of 36 feet will be required.
Cul-de-Sacs must have a minimum paved diameter of 80 feet.
The street in Phase I should be moved south approximately 80 feet adjacent
to Lot 2, Block 9 to preserve the existing pond.- In all. other respects we find
the street plans in accordance with City Standards.
SANITARY SEWER:
Trunk sanitary sewer service will be provided by a locally sized trunk
designated as "Lake Ann Interceptor", on the utility drawing submitted. The
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has stated that they will approve con-
struction of this local trunk if it would not "complicate construction of our
future interceptor or unduly increase the interceptor construction cost."
(See attached letter from MWCC, dated January 23, 1978.) The City Planner
has arranged a meeting with MWCC and Metropolitan Council Staff to clarify
this condition since the proposed trunk line will cause some interference
with the future interceptor.
The local trunk should be 36 inch diameter from the existing Lake Ann
Interceptor, Phase I, east of Highway 101 to the railroad tracks on the pro-
posed property and 30 inch north of the tracks to Highway 5. All other sewer
should be 10 inch diameter.
WATER:
The primary source of water supply will be a proposed well on Outlot E
(not shown). A secondary source will be provided by connection of the proposed
system to the existing.10 inch watermain on West 78th Street near the Chanhassen
State Bank.
Watermain should be sized as shown on the utility plan submitted. Hydrant
spacing should be a maximum of 300 feet.
DRAINAGE:
The storm sewer line between Lots 3 and 4, Block 11, should be eliminated
and the storm sewer in the street reversed to flow to the pond on Lot 2,
Block 9. Provision for a permanent storage and sediment control pond should
be made on Outlot E. Otherwise the storm sewer collection plan appears
adequate.
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
City of Chanhassen January 30, 1978
c/o Mr. Don Ashworth, City Manager
Attention: Mr. Bruce Pankonin
Page 3
These plans have been submitted to the Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed
District Engineers for their comments. We believe the plans are in general
accordance with their regulations.
SUMMARY:
We recommend approval of the plan subject to:
1) Realignment of the street adjacent to Lot 2, Block 9;
2) Increasing the trunk sewer size from 30 inch to 36 inch south
and east of the railroad tracks;
3) Provision for a storage pond on Outlot E, and elimination of
the storm sewer between Lots 3 and 4, as described;
4) Conformance with requirements of the Riley -Purgatory Creek Water-
shed District.
Very truly yours,
SCHOELL & MADSON, INC.
WJBrezinsky:bk
enclosure
CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK
Developer's Statement
Planned for Industrial Development
January 27, 1978
Owner: Lake Susan Hills (a Minnesota Limited Partnership)
4940 Viking Drive - Suite #608
Pentagon Office Park
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435
Applicant & Developer: Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.
4940 Viking Drive - Suite #608
Pentagon Office Park
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435
Type of Development: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park is a
276.5 acre Planned Industrial and
Business Development. It will be built
in three phases over 12 years. Uses
will range from light manufacturing to'
offices, laboratories and warehousing.
Average industrial lot sizes will be
2-2 2 acres. Independent market studies
indicate a market absorption of 15-25
acres per year.
Modification to Present zoning is R-lA Agricultural.
Existing. Zoning: Developer's request is to change to
Planned Industrial Development (P-4)
with no variances.presently contemplated
from permitted uses.
Development Schedule: Refer to Schedule A of Application.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 29, 1978
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJ: Dunn and Curry Chanhassen Planned Industrial Development
(PID)
PLANNING CASE: P-054
If the Chanhassen City Council on Monday, February 6, 1978, orders
a public hearing to consider installation of sanitary sewer, water
and roads into the Dunn and Curry Planned Industrial Development,
I would request the City Council give the Planning Commission the
authority to proceed with necessary public hearings to consider
Dunn and Curry's proposed preliminary development plan and rezoning
petition. As you know, City Council resolution dated September 11,
1972, (Number 119721) states explicitly that:
1. Land proposed to be developed as a Planned Development
District not currently served by sanitary sewer and water will not
be considered beyond the sketch plan stage as set forth in the Chanhassen.
Zoning Ordinance.
2. The applicant (Dunn and Curry Lake Susan Hills Limited
Partnership) may prepare a sketch plan with such supplementary
documentation set forth under Section 14.05, Paragraph 3 (a), as
the applicant desires for review and informal discussion by the
Planning Commission.
Said sketch plan discussed commenced in September, 1975.
3. When the necessary utilities needed to serve the proposed
planned development are available or are emminent, the applicant may
then proceed to the Preliminary Development Plan as specified in
Section 14.05, Paragraph 3, of ordinance 47, Chanhassen Zoning
Ordinance.
4. We have the further problem of city ordinance 45 (the 21,
acre ordinance) which provides that the platting and subdivision of
land within 4reas not served by sanitary sewer shall be prohibited
until sewer is available to serve such area.
--N, 1--(1 January 29, 1978
Mr. Don Ashworth -2-
In summary, it appears that a planned unit development cannot be
considered beyond the sketch plan stage until necessary sanitary
sewer is immediately available or emminent. Attorney Larson, in
correspondence to previous planning commission, interpreted the word
"emminent" to be likely to happen without delay.
At this time, I would like the City Council, if the council orders
the public hearing to consider installation of utilities to the Dunn
and Curry property; to state ordering a public hearing is within the
scope of the definition of the word "emminent".
INDUSTRIALS I
PLANNED MMWWTXU DEVELOPMENT (UD)
or CASE NO. PRD/PCD /a'OS1
City of Chanhassen
Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST
Date of Application January 27, 1978
Escrow Paid plr� D to►i
Received by "it
Applicant
Name: Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.
Address: 4940 Viking Drive, Pentagon Office Park, Minneapolis, Mn. 55435
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Owner: Lake Susan Hills A Minnesota Limited Partnership)
Kxx
Address:4940 Viking Drive, Pentagon Office Park, Minneapolis, Mn 55435
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Address of property in question:
N 1/2 of Section 14 and part of N 1/2 of Section 13.
Legal description of property in question:
SEE EXHIBIT "A"
Under Separate Cover
Present zoning of property: AR-1
Present use of property: Fallow
Proposed use of property: Business - (Light industrial/office)
(See Schedule The followina documents shall be attached to this application:
Date Received
1. Sketch Plan
2. Preliminary Development Plan
3. Escrow Account- ($500.00)
Initial
.
Date Received Initial
4. Abstractor's Certificate
5. Final Development Plan
I hereby declare that all statements made in this application and on
the attached documents are true, and that I shall reimburse the
City for all expenses incurred in processing this application for
planned unit development. a " 0
Sat' e_ of Ap`lica t
4Signatqfe of Owner
& ; D"-C�
�3
Efate
ei_
Received by 1 date
(Following to be completed by Aoning Administrator or City Official)
CHRONOLOGY
DATE
BY
Sketch Plan on Planning Commission Agenda
T „2 7&
1110
Planning Commission Postponed to
Preliminary Development Plan on
Planning Commission Agenda
4
Planning Commission Postponed to
Newspaper Publication
Adjacent PropertyOwners Notified
T$
Public Hearin
A+" -
Planning Commission Action
Preliminary Development Plan on
Council Agenda
Council Postponed to
Council Action
Preliminary Development Plan Contract
Final Development Plan or
Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed to
•.Final Development Plan on Council Agenda
Council Post oned to
Final Development Plan Contract Executed
Escrow Returned - Amount:
l
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (Preliminary Development Plan)
On this day of 19 , this PRD/PCD
was recommended for (approval), sapproval subject to the
following conditions:
Chairman or Planning Commission
Action by City - Preliminary Development Plan
On this - day of 19 , the Chanhassen City
Council, Carver anc Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapprove(
this Preliminary PRD/PCD subject to the following conditions:
By order of the Chanhassen
City Council
Mayor -- --- - - --- -
Attest:
City Administrator
a
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION - Final Development Plan
On this day of -19 , this Final
Development Plan was recommen ed for approval), Tc3isapproval) subject
to the following conditions:
Chairman of Planning Commission
Action by City - Final Development Plan
On this _ day of 19 , the Chanhassen City
Council1-Car v--er-and HC ennepin ounties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved
this Final PRD/PCD subject to the following conditions:
Attest:
City A min1strator
By order of the Chanhassen
City Council
Mayor- -- -
s.
(612) 827- 5893
Land Planning O o O O
Environmental Planning
Urban Design
Graphic Design
January
23,
1977
CHANHASSEN LAKES
BUSINESS PARK
Acrea e
Breakdown
v
rn
3
•--
5(V..
�
W
U
Q
n
ri
N
Z
`
\
S-
ii
tL
.Q
S
M
0
CL'
N
N
a)
S.
Ql
S.-
E
a)
.d
S.
+.)
O
S.
+->
+j
cN
+)
V)
Z
V1
U
to
J
z
O
C
+-
C
3
O
O
O
Q
to
-P
N
to
�[
U
(v
to
-
-
F-
O
r-
tt3
O
i.)
N
.-
O
O�
o
O
4--)
a
m
Z
a
00
. i
f-
O
8
12.2ac.
-
4.8ac.
7.8ac.
-
Phase I
e/26.9ac.
9
23.5
-
-
-
-
f/
1.Oac.
'
10
10.9
-
-
-
-
g/
0.8ac.
11
27.9
-
-
-
-
12
6.6
-
-
-
-
81.1ac.
-
4.8ac.
7.8ac.
-
93.7ac.
28.7ac.
1
37.3ac.
1.97
2.9ac.
6.4ac.
-
Phase II
a/
2.9ac.
2
23.5ac.
-
-
-
-
b/
3.2ac.
3
11.8ac.
-
-
-
-
c/
2.5ac.
4
29.2ac.
-
-
-
-
101.8ac.
1.97
2.9ac.
6.4ac.
-
113.07ac.
8.6ac.
5
34.6ac.
.38
3.Oac.
3.7ac.
5.5ac.
Phase III
d/
7.7ac.
6
6.7ac.
-
-
-
-
7
15.96c.
-
-
-
-
57.2ac.
.38
3.Oac.
3.7ac.
5.5ac.
69.78ac.
7.7ac.�
T O T
A L
240.1ac.
2.35ac.10.7ac.
17.9ac.
5.5ac.276.55ac.
45.Oac.
�. 2614 Nicollet Avenue` Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408
IrN0 R- rH
1 O 1 2 3 4 s5m—s
Lake Minjeto
7
hanhassen C y Limit#'
17 (1I
--
1�
�K
1 I 2-169
�e -:,
I Minnesota River
I.694
Mpls CB
1.494
ME
1.35W
Chanhassen Lakes E$usiness Park
• Metro Setting
CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK
DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS
CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, LTD., the Developer of
the premises described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof, to insure the appropriate land use thereof and
proper development and improvement of said premises hereby
makes this declaration for the purpose of subjecting the
premises described in Exhibit A to the covenants, restrictions,
conditions and standards herein; and the land described in
Exhibit A shall be developed and operated in accordance with
the standards so as 1) to protect the value of each building
site, 2) to insure that each site is developed with attractive
improvements constructed of suitable materials, and 3) to
provide for the harmonious appearance and function of Chanhassen
Lakes Business Park.
NOW THEREFORE, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., a
Minnesota limited partnership, hereby.declares that the laird
described in Exhibit A hereof shall be developed and used in
accordance with the following standards and guidelines as to
each and every part thereof and shall be binding upon each
owner, and the successors in interest thereof.
SECTION I. PERMITTED USES
1.01 Uses
All commercial, office, warehousing, or industrial uses
shall be permitted except as may otherwise be prohibited hereby,
or by the boning and land use ordinances and regulations of the
i
;•
8
-
City of Chanhassen. Said zoning regulations shall govern if
inconsistent herewith to the extent actually inconsistent; but
if not inconsistent herewith, the standards herein contained
shall be considered as requirements in addition to said zoning
regulations.
1.02 Prohibitions
No noxious or offensive trades, services or activities
shall be conducted on nor shall anything be done on any site
which may be'or become an annoyance or nuisance to other Owners
of the land subject hereto by reason of unsightliness or excessive
emission of odors, fumes, smoke, vibration, dirt, dust, glare,
wastes or noise.
SECTION II. APPROVAL OF PLANS
2.01 Submissions/Approval
No improvements shall be erected, placed or exteriorly
altered on any building site until the building or other alteration
plans, specifications, including front elevations and/or architects
rendering, a plat showing the location of such improvement on the
particular building site, including parking, loading and landscape
plans, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Developer, its successors or assigns, as to architectural compatibility
and harmony of external design with existing structures in Chanhassen
Lakes Business Park, as to location of the improvements on the
building site, as giving due regard to the anticipated use thereof
as same may affect adjoining structures, use and operations, as to
location of the improvement with respect to topography, grade and
finished ground elevation and as to fulfilling the purposes of
this declaration. The Developer shall not unreasonably withhold
approval of any plans submitted pursuant hereto; provided,
however, that failure to meet the standards contained herein
shall be grounds for disapproval of any such plans. Failure
to disapprove any plans within sixty (60) days after submission.
of said plans to it shall be deemed to be approved thereof._
2.02 Commencement of Improvements
Upon receipt of approval, the owner or lessee or other party
to whom the same is given shall, as soon as is practical, satisfy
all conditions thereof and diligently proceed with the commence-
ment and completion of all construction or alterations. In all
cases work shall begin within one year from the date of such
approval. If there is a failure to comply, then the approval
given pursuant to this Section shall be deemed revoked unless
the Developer, upon request made prior to the expiration of said
one year period, extends the time for commencing work.
2.03 Building Code
All improvements shall be constructed in conformity with
the existing building codes of the City of Chanhassen.
2-.04 Completion of Improvements
After commencement of the construction and alterations
referred to above, the work shall be diligently undertaken so
that the site shall not remain in a partly finished condition
any longer than reasonably necessary for the completion thereof.
Completion of construction -or alteration of such Improvement shall
be within two years after commencement except for so long as com-
pletion is rendered impossible or would result in great hardship
due to strikes, fires, national calamities, or other forces beyond
the control of the Owner or his tenants, agents or assigns.
2.05 Landscaping Completion
The site shall be landscaped in accordance with approved plans
within nine (9) months of occupancy or completion (whichever -
shall first occur) of the building improvement.
2.06 Non -liability
The Developer or its successors and assigns shall not be
liable to anyone in damages who has submitted plans for approval
or to any land owner by reason of mistake in judgment, negligence,
or non-feasance of itself, its agents or employees, arising out
of or in connection with the approval or disapproval of any such
plans. Likewise anyone so submitting -.plans to the Developer,
its successors and assigns, for approval, by submitting such
plans, and any person when he becomes an owner agrees that he or
it will not bring any action or suit to recover for any such
damages against the Developer.
2_07 Lot Subdivision
No lot shall be subdivided without the express consent
of the City of Chanhassen and the Developer or its successor.
SECTION III. IMPROVEMENT REGULATION
3.01 Setback
(a) General No structure of any kind, and no part
thereof, shall be placed on any site closer to a property line
than herein provided. The following structures and improvements
are specifically excluded from these setback provisions:
4
(1) Roof overhang, subject to the specific
approval of the Developer in writing.
(2) Steps and walk.
(3) Paving and associated curbing, except that
vehicle parking areas shall not be permitted within twenty—five
(25) feet of the street or property lines.
(4) Fences, except that no fence shall be
placed within the street setback area unless specific approval
is given by Developer in writing.
(5) Landscaping.
(6) Planters, not to exceed three_ (3) feet.
in height.
(7) Railroad spur tracks, switches and bumpers,
provided that the location of such tracks, switches and bumpers
is specifically approved by Developer in writing.
(8) Gas and service stations including all
appurtenant uses, subject to the specific written approval of the
Developer.
(9) Displays identifying the owner, lessee, or
occupant, as approved by the Developer in writing_
(b) Setback from Interior Property Lines The setback
line is established as twenty-five (25) feet from an interior
property line-
(c) Setback from Street Property Lines The setback
line is established as thirty (30) feet from.a street property
line.
3.02 Excavation
No excavation shall be made except in connection with construc-
tion of an improvement, and upon completion thereof exposed openings
shall be backfilled and disturbed ground shall be graded and leveled_
3.03 Landscaping Requirements
(a) Every site on which a building shall have been
placed shall be landscaped according to plans approved as
specified herein and maintained thereafter in a -sightly and
well -kept condition.
(b) The property owner, lessee or occupant shall land-
scape and maintain unpaved areas between the property lines and . -
the setback lines. The first twenty-five (25) feet of the setback
from street property lines shall be used exclusively for landscaping
except for walks and driveways bisecting the required landscape
area.
(c) The property owner, lessee or occupant shall
provide hose bibs and maintenance facilities in the vicinity of
the landscaped areas.
3.04 Signs
(a) No billboard or advertising sign shall be permitted,
other than the following:
(1) Those identifying the name, business and
products of the person or firm occupying the premises, and
(2) Those offering the premises for sale or
lease when specifically approved by Developer in writing.
(b) Signs shall conform to setback lines unless
specific approval to the contrary is granted by Developer in
writing.
2.1
(c) Signs and identification on buildings or building
sites shall only be of such size, design and color as is specifically
approved by the Developer in writing. The Developer shall, at the
Owner's request, provide sign criteria used by the Developer in
determining whether to grant sign approval or not.
3.05 Parking Areas
(a) General Adequate off-street parking shall be
provided to accommodate all parking needs for employees, visitors
and company vehicles on the site. If -parking requirements increase
as a result of a change in use or number of employees, additional
off-street parking shall be provided to satisfy the intent of
this section.
(b) Parking shall not be permitted:
(1) Between public street pavement and property
line.
(2) Closer than twenty-five (25) feet to a
street property line.
(3) On any public streets and roadways.
(c) The parking requirements may be modified by the
Developer as to any particular site as a precondition to plan
approval.
3.06 Storage and Loading Areas
(a) No materials, supplies or equipment, including
company owned or operated trucks, shall be stored in any area
7
on a site except inside a closed building, or behind a visual
barrier screening such areas from the view of adjoining properties
and/or a public street.
(b) Loading areas shall not encroach into setback.
areas unless specifically approved by Developer in writing-
(c) Loading docks shall be set back and screened to
minimize the effect from the street. Docks shall not be closer
than seventy (70) feet to the street property line, unless
specifically approved by Developer in writing. Loading will be
permitted to the rear of the setback line from that portion of
a structure not fronting a street.
SECTION IV. TERM; ASSOCIATION; AMENDMENT
4.01 Term
The covenants and declarations of this Declaration shall
'run with and bind the land described in Exhibit A for a term of
thirty (30) years from the date this Declaration is recorded
in the Office of the Carver County Recorder, after which time
they may extended for successive periods of ten (10) years
upon the affirmative majority vote of the members of the
association referred to in Section 4.02 hereof.
4.02 Owners' Association
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. shall have the right
to create a non-profit association in which all owners of each
site (as defined hereinafter) are entitled to be members. There
shall be no other qualification for membership and no costs in
0
connection therewith. The owner (or owners) of each site shall have
one vote in such association, and membership therein shall be
appurtenant to, and shall not be separated from the ownership of
any platted lot. "Site" for the purposes of this Declaration
shall be defined as any parcel of land conveyed by the Developer
herein to any one grantee for use as a building parcel, wh ether
a single platted lot or more.
4.03 Transfer of Rights
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. shall have the right
to assign all of its rights hereunder to any such association
referred to in Section 4.02 hereof or to any successor developing
all of the then unsold lots in the plat described in Exhibit. A.
4.04 Amendment
This Declaration may be amended by an instrument signed by
seventy-five percent of the members of the Association referred
to in Section 4.02 hereof. Any amendment so made shall be
effective upon the recording thereof.
SECTION V. ENFORCEMENT
5.01 Abatement and Suit
The standards set forth herein shall be enforceable by the
Developer, its successors and assigns, for the maximum period
allowed by law and shall be enforceable by the Developer, its
successors and assigns, by (i) injunctive relief, prohibitive
or mandatory, to prevent the breach of or to enforce the perform-
ance or observance of these standards, or by (ii) a money judgment
for damages by reason of a breach of these standards, or (iii) both
(i) and (ii) .
5.02 Failure to Enforce
The failure of the Developer, its successors or assigns,
to enforce any provisions of the standards contained herein upon
the violation thereof shall in no event be deemed to be a waiver
of the rights to do so as to any subsequent violation_
5.03 Severability
Invalidation of any of the provisions of these standards,
whether by court order or otherwise, shall in no way affect any
of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and
effect.
5.04 Attorney's Fees
In any legal or equitable proceeding for the enforcement
or to restrain the violation of this Declaration or any provision
hereof, the losing party or parties shall pay the attorney's fees
of the prevailing party or parties, in such amount as may be fixed
by the Court in such proceedings. All remedies provided herein
or at law or in equity shall be cumulative and not exclusive_
5.05 Mortgagee's Rights
No violation of any of these Declarations shall defeat or
render invalid the lien of any mortgage made in good faith and
for value upon any site; provided, -however, that any mortgagee
in actual possession, or any purchaser at any mortgagees' or
10
foreclosure sale shall be bound by and subject to these Declarations
as fully as any other owner of any site subject. hereto_
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd_,
have caused these presents to be executed this /3' day of
1979.
CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, LTD.
a Minnesota limited partnership,
By: Dunn & Curry Real Estate
Management, Inc., its
No Seal
- Li� A
AG•
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was ac 'owledged bef-or me this
/9}� * Y of �u�sr�a- , 1979, by.
as and by
as of Dunr%'& Curry Real Estate `
Management, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of said
corporation as General Partner of Chanhassen Lakes Business
Park, -Ltd., a Minnesota limited partnership.
L,
Notary Pbblic
ARLYNE E,,�E
11 p}QTAAY Pt18LAHENNEPIMyCommission E984
} °B The undersigned, Emmer Brothers Company, a Minnesota
5
corporation., as fee owner, together with Dunn and CurryReal
Estate Management, Inc.., a Minnesota corporation, Lake Susan
Hills, a Minnesota partnership, Edmund B. Dunn and Elizabeth J.-
Dann, his T•7ife, and James A. Curry and Barbara W. Curry, his wife,
as contract for deed vendors, and First Southdale National Bank of
Edina, a national banking association, as mortgagee, hereby assent
to the foregoing Development Covenants and Restrictions executed
by Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., and hereby consent the
imposition thereof upon the land described in. Exhibit A hereof,
and acree to the subjugation of said lands to said covenants and
restrictions.
No Seal
EMMER BROTHERS COMP.
a Minnq--.s6ta corpora
By:
its %� and
i 1
S-TATE\ 'OF.'MINNESO A)
.) ss.
COUNTYIC-' / lim0zNjFVlfh3)
The forego' g instrument was ack wledged rbefore me this
day of ,.1979, by
as . r' and by
as of Emmer Orothervco., a Minnesota
corpor tion, on behalf of said corporation.
VIOLA F. ivTCANDRcWs
-."-
Y.ENNEPiN COU.ITY
NOT PUSLlC-T�:NN330TA
HY COM N!55NJIY EXPIRES AUG. ]6,
EXPIRES
Notary Public
DUNN & CY PEAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT,
INC., a nesota corporat#hn
is _�i�.c�.��..irt/i�✓/"!1
its/ _ ,� and
l
il t
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The forego* instrument was acknowledged bef opq m this
/J� �b day of 1979, by Zc' Z
as _ and by C
as of Dun -Curry Real Estes e
Managemdht, I-'c., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of said
corporation.
�1 ARLYNE F. PORTER otary fd lic
NOTARY PUe3LlC - MINNESOTA
a HEN?-!FP1N COUNTY
-.•• a May 7, 1984
ti'.'r+`I�I•.).''.."s+:.i-vd,t.:•.. �:>'>S-..rJ.r.wx... ��__�
LAKE SUSAN HILLS, a Minnesota
partner p
By r cL/ -til
Edmund B. Dunn, Partner
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoi g instrument was acknowledged before me this
/3yl-, day of 1979, by Edmund B. Dunn, a partner
in Lake Susan Hil s, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf. of said
partnership.
ARLYNE F. PORTER Y L�J 7cJ
NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA 1
off HENNEPIN COUNTY Not -y'ublic
'� •2 �my Commission Expvos May7. 19&4
Edmund B. Dunn
/'0,=4 '4-L� -
liz be-ch J. pdnK
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
4V� day of _mot , 1979, by Edmund B. Dunn and Elizabeth J_
Dunn, his wife. j=
^� ARLYNE F. PORTER
�t.u� NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
mes A. Curry
Barbara W. Curry
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
,,,?he foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
/,��� day of �,����� , 1979, by James A. Curry and
Barbara W. Curry;,'. is wife.
ARI_YNE F. PORTER
i� ''� NOTARY PUBLIC -MINNESOTA
\� ,� HENNEPIN COUNTY
�14 My Commission Expvas May 7, 1984
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
ary &Fublic
FIRST SOUTHDALE NATIONAL BANK OF-
EDINA, a national banking
association,.
By: ��`-E`-GS
its Ucc4o_ owsi -e'l- and
� a-��--�-jam'--
its ss,s� Uii�!�irs�dt
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
/ day of 1979, 'by?""e
as and by
as v«,r, of First Southdale National Bank
of tdina, a national banking association, on behalf of said
association.
V
ROLAND W HOLT
NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA
�'►4 HENNEPIN COUNTY
My Commission Expires Mar. 12. 1986
x vvvvwvvwv �
C� A
Notary Public .
14
Lots One (1) through Ten (10), Block One (1); Lots One (1)
through Five (5), Block Two (2); Lots One (1) and Two (2)
Block Three (3); Lots One (1) and Two (2), Block Four (4)
and Lots One (1) through Eleven (11), Block Five (5), all
in CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, according to the plat
thereof on - file and of record in the Office of the County
Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota.
EXHIBIT A
CITY -OF
CBANH�SS��
7610 LAREDO DRIVE 0 P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Community Development Director, Scott Martin
FROM: Park. and Recreation Director, Francis Callahan'
DATE: March 19, 1981
SUBJ: Dunn and Curry Development Co. Park Dedication
The Park and Recreation Commission has met with the developer over
the past 18 months. During this period of time, many meetings were
held defining where the park land should be located, what type of
activity should be planned for each site, etc., according to modern
park planning principles and philosophy.
City staff (planning and park)'additionally held many meetings with
Ed Dunn establishing the dedication for the entire development plan.
Attached you will find the minutes of the January 8, 1980 meeting of
the Park and Recreation Commission_ wherein they made their recommendations
The Park and Recreation Commission was directed. to review the proposal
again in August, 1980 when there were some concerns about the creation
of mini -parks and also concerns about the shoreland around Lake Susan.
The Commission unanimously reaffirmed their action of January 8, 1980..
This office does"not feel another meeting with the developer would
be desirable 6r`beneficial. Both the developer. and the. Park and
Recreation Commission are comfortable with the present park plan..
Park Dedication Ordinance
The Park Commission is an advisory -.body which makes park related
recommendations to the City Council. Through negotiations with
the developer, the City Council establishes what the park fee will
be, i.e. cash, land or a combination of both.
ALSCOR INVESTORS JOINT VENTURE
800 Opus Center
9900 Bren Road East
Minneapolis, MN 55440
March 20, 1985
City of Chanhassen
City Hall
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Sir:
art Vim, J
Enclosed are copies of the Alscor audited financial sq'atements and the
unaudited operating statement of the premises, in com liance with article
4.01 of the loan agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Alscor
Investors Joint Venture dated November 25, 1983.
If you have any questions regarding these items, please call me at 936-4430.
Sincerely,
Karen Cronin
Senior Accountant
KC/le
cc: Alice Schmidt
Mark Rauenhorst
Tom Burke
Bob Perkins
Gene Haugland
Encl.
MAR 2 51985
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Chanhassen. Lakes
Statement of Operations
For the Year Ended December 31, 1984
Income
Rental Income $ 54,897
Escalation Income 5,378
Interest Income 9,344
Total Income $ 69,619
Expenses
Energy
$ 21,689
HVAC Maintenance
3,364
Plumbing Maintenance
576
Electrical Maintenance
651
Lot and Landscaping
2,922
General Building
1,234
Administrative
6,145
Insurance
11089
Real Estate Taxes
64,886
Total Expenses
$ 102,556
Operating Loss
$( 32,937)
Interest
151,907
Depreciation
45,943
Net Loss
$(230,787)
I certify that the above information is true and come t for the year
ended December 31, 1984.
Name
Title EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT - DEVELOPMENT
Opus Corporation
Signing as partner for
Alscor Investors Joint Venture
Date March 20, 1985
Al
1 V- C. 1, l A, k I '�- "_JI
ri _DFT-
.A
MItsNES.DTr
Er:VIRON" E-UAL ASSESSMENT
AND N(`TIC OF F TNui N ,-
1+0 N+ 7 W1- '?'1: IN THI S SPA( 1•:
NOTE: The purpose of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is to provide
information on a project so that one can assess rapidly whether or not the
project requires an Environmental Impact Statement. Attach additional
pages, charts, maps, etc, as needed to answer these questions. Your
answers should be as specific as possible. Indicate which answers are
estimated,
SUMMARY
A. ACTIVITY FINDING BY RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (PERSON)
oNegative Declaration (No EIS) El EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required)
B. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION
1. Project name or title Chanhassen I ak s Business Pars
2. Project proposer(s) Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.
Address 4940 Viking Drive, Minneapolis, Mn._ 55435
Telephone Number and Area Code ( 612 ) 835-2808
3. Responsible Agency or Person City of Chanhassen
Address 7610 Laredo Drive. P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Mn_ 55,117
Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information
on this EAW: Bruce Pankonin Telephone 474-8885
4. This EAW and other supporting documentation are available for public in-
spection and/or copying at: Location
Telephone
5. Reason for EAW Preparation
Mandatory Category -cite
MEQC Rule number(s)
C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION S1iMMARY
1. Project location
Hours
UPetition Othei
County Carver : ity/Township name _ Chanhassen If
Township n•imber _ 116 _ _ ( Nort h) , Rana( N.urber 23 _Ea _� t n Wes ( c i 2-
Section. number (s) 13/ 14 Street address (if in city, cr : egai desc, i; - _ , -
l
2. Type and scope ci rrow e _
3. Estimated starting date (mcnt:-:; yca2 ?_ _ 1918_._
4. Estimated completion date (month/ yrar) _ i 9.gn
5. Estimated construction cost __ __Not available
6. List any federal funding involved and known permits or approvals nets is?u
from each unit of government and status of each:
Unit of Government Name or Type of Permit/Approval Status
(federal, state, or Federal Funding
regional, local)
State PCA Indirect Source Permit (air)
Purgatory Cteek Refer to note #1
7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS
be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act? X NO YES UNKNOWN
Federal permits are not needed.
II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
A. Include the following maps or drawings:
1. A map showing the regional location of the project.
2. An original 8'- x 11 section of a U.S.G.S. 7111 minute, 1:24,000 scale map
with the activity or project area boundaries and site layout delineated.
Indicate quadrangle sheet name. (Original U.S.G.S. sheet must be main-
tained by Responsible Agency; legible copies may be supplied.to other
EAW distribution points._)
3. A sketch map of the site showing location.of structures and including
significant natural features (water bodies, roads, etc).
4. Current photos of the site must be maintained by the Responsible Agency.
Photos need not be sent to other distribution points.
B. Present land use.
1. Briefly describe the present use of the site and lands adjacent to the site.
Industrial to the N.E., agricultural to W.S..E. & State Hwy. 5 to the North.
2. Indicate the approximate acreages el the site that are:
a. Urban developed N/A acres f. Wetlands (Type I11, 1V, V)
b. Urban vacant 66.55 acres g. thereland -
c. Rural developed N/A acre
d. Rural vacant - acres
e. Designated Recre-.5.0tacres
1. rc,l Ian4/Pas t are l ai:d
F-rested
200.0=
10
i
a*__on pen
*Includes 10 AC flood plain, and 2,000 feet shoreland.
N
e)
III
List names and sizes of lakes, jivers and streams or or nea. t :e site,
particularly lakes within 1,C00 feet and rivers and streams withJn
300 feet.
Lake Susan
Riley Creek
C. Activity Description
1. Describe the proposed activity, including staging cf development (if any),
operational characteristics, and major types of equipment and/or pro-
cesses to be used. Include data that would indicate the magnitude of
the proposed activity (e.g. rate of production, number of customers, tons
of raw materials, etc). Lake Susan Hills Business Park calls for the crea-
tion of a 276.5 acre Industrial Park. Of the total, 240.1 acres will be
devoted to industrial uses. This will be subdivided into lots ranging in
size from 1.5 to 5.0 ac. Development will take place in three phases as
follows:
1st .......... 1977-1984.......... 81.1 ac.
2nd.......... 1982-1987......... 101.8 ac.
3rd.......... 1986-1990.......... 57.2 ac.
2. Fill in the following where applicable:
a. Total project area 276.5acres g.
or
Length
N/A miles *h.
b. Number of housing or
recreational units 0 *i•
C. Height of structures N/Aft. j-
Id. Number of parking
spaces App. 4,500 k.
See note _.
e. Amount of dredging O cu. yd.
1.
f. Liquid wastes requir-
ing treatment 0.6 MGDgal/da
ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Size of marina and access N/A sq. ft.
channel (water area)
Vehicular traffic trips See note #2
generated per day 151000 ADT
about 5,000 1st phase (by end of 1984)
Number of employees Appx. 4.080
1st phase 1,400
Water supply needed 0.69 MGDgal/da
Source: City of Chanhassen
Solid waste requiring
disposal unknown at thia_tons/yr
time
Commercial, retail or unknown at this
industrial floor space time sq. ft.
A. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY
1. Will the project,be built in an area with slopes currently
exceeding 12%? No X Yes
2. Are there other geologically unstable areas involved in the project,
such as fault zones, shrink -swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes? ,NO X YES
3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slope conditions or unstable area and any
measures to be used tc reduce potential adverse impacts.
The majority of the areas with slopes in excess of 12% are to be public open
space and will not be used for construction. The remainder is divided up
into the various parcels where either construction will be avoided or cut
anc fill will be employed.
The C-a-rver Count -y soil survey indicates that there is' some peat on the
site. Design constraints will be employed to insure safe construction.
i
4. Indicate
sui`at : _
�, _e _ _i =
: oz fou -at
systems,
and dit .._.:q,
:f ti es,2 ar
included 'in t!-e r_rc;e:ct.
• Will use
metropolitan
waste system,
No on site disposal will be needed.
5. Estimate the total amour t )f (?i ad.ing an,i fil lit (3whi .:' t�i ] ] Son.
25,000 cu. yd. gradi.nc; 25,000cu. yd. filling
What percent of the site will be so altered:' 10 t
This is an estimate of this road grading only. Until we can determine uses
6. What will be the maximum finished slopes? we cannot determine lot _ 3ol %
grading.
7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and
after construction:
Soil will be kept on the site by constructing sediment traps at all major
runoff areas. Also, turf will be established on exposed soils as soon as
possible.
B. VEGETATION
1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following
vegetative types:
Woodland
3
Brush or shrubs 12
Grass or herbaceous
Cropland/ 79
Pasture
"arsh _%
other 0 %
(Specify)
2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? 5 acres
3. Are there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique
botanical or biological significance on the site? (See DNR publication
The Uncommon ones.) __�X_NO YES
If yes, 1st e species or area and indicate anv measures to be used
to reduce potential adverse i ntt?act.
F'1SH AND WILDLIFE
1. Are there any designated federal, state or local wildlife or fish manage-
ment areas or sanctuaries near or adjacent to the site? X NO YES
2. Are there any known rare or endangered species of fish and wildlife
on oT near the site? (See DNTF publicat i.or The uncommon X NO __YES
Ones.)
see below
3. will the proj(_ct altar or climinatk' %ai'dlii of fish — NO * `'ES
habitat?
4. If yes or. any of q icsticns l- 3, li st the area, 3prcic s or habi 1 a? , 2nd
'ndlcafe any mE astir'': 10 l,e 17s('d LcJ 1edur', po :.P' 7 1 •9dVPT ]mPa t
them.
*There will be displacement of some species which is unavoidable as with
any type of development.
- 4 -
D. HYDROLOGY
1. Will the project includE a.: ' cf ' `.e
If yes, describe tj i e )f w-; i '�.
to reducE adver se i1al,a,-:tz .
J,. c
a. Drainage or alteration cr sry 7ama! :A
lowland or groundwater =uar l ) X_
X
L. Shore protection works., dams, cr i._neS
c. Dredging or filling operations
d. Channel modifications or diversions X
e. Appropriation of ground and/or surface water X
f. other changes in the course, current or cross-
section of water bodies on or near the site X
2. What percent of the area will be converted to new impervious surface. 50±
*
3. What measures will be taken to reduce the volume of surface water run-
off and/or treat it to reduce pollutants tsedirlcrt, oil, 9&S, etc.)?
A system of weirs is proposed to be established along the creek's course
prior to getting to Lake Susan.
* Because the site is broken into many lots, of 1.5-5 ac. in size the resulting
open space or areas of setback, will be larger than otherwise would be.
Accurate estimates are not possible at this time since the users of the lots
are of defibned -yet. �We� r�ou14 hc� e. esti�a�ib� OaPP rrS0' d11T-60%.
4. Wil� there e e croac.:m n 1n o e region
by new fill or structures? All flood plains plus surroun- _X—NO YES
ding are in park dedicatipns.
If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO X YES
5. What is the api)roximate minimum depth to groundwater on feet
the site?
L WATER QUALITY
1. Will there be a discharge of process or cooling water, sanitary sewage
or other waste waters to any water body or to groundwater? _K_NO YES
If yes, specify the volume, the concentration of pollutants and the
water body receiving the effluent.
2. If discharge of waste water to the municipal treatment system is
planned, identity .a1v toxic, corrosive or unusual pollutants -
in the wastewater. N/A
_ T'
3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed I _ ect? _L_NO _'`
If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical ,-,)-rI}c-.tion and me1nod
of disposal. It is conceivable that some firm which generates such a by-
product may be sited in the development at some future time. If this ever
does happen it can be regulated by the city at that time.
' 1
in ,luestions 1-3: If any problems arise in this area it will be up to the
concerned firm and public agencies that will work on possible solutions.
The developer cannot anticipate nor deal with such problems as they will not
occur until construction is completed. At this time however none is anticipa-
ted .
5. 71 t;lei roject is �z includes a land ill, attach inf,,rmat.nn on soil i 1-c;ile,
dentn to water table, and proposed depth of. disposal.
0
F. AIR QUALITY AND NOISE
1. will the activity cause the emission of any gases and/or particulates
into the atmosphere? 110 _Xx YES !.
If yes, specify the type and origin of these emissions, indicate any
emission control devices or measures to be used, and specify the approxi-
mate amounts for each emission (at the source) both with and without the
emission control measures or devices. Non -point air pol utlon source due to
number of parking spaces. Industrial process's of resident firms may also
contribute to the condition. However it should be noted that this may be
controlled by concerned agencies when such firms apply for building and other
essential permits.
2. ;9ill noise or vibration be generated by construction and/or operation
of the Project? NO -YES
If yes, describe the noise source(s)\; specify decibel levels [dB(A)J, and
y duration (hrs/da) for each and any mitigative measures to reduce the
noise/vibration. During working hours, activity related to construction will
cause noise to be generated in the area of 76-85 DB(A). Resident firms may
contribute to the problem after construction however this can be regulated
by concerned agencies at that time.
3. If yes on 1 or 2, specify whether any areas sensitive to noise or
reduced air quality -(hospitals, elderly housing, wilderness, wildlife
areas, residential developments, etc.) are in the affected area and give
distance from source. There are no such "sensitive" areas adjacent to or
in the general area of the site.
G. LAND RESOMM CONSERVATION, ENERGY
1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production
or currently in such use? NO _AYES
If yes, specify tae acrea,_ae involved, t.,pe and volume of marketable ci
or wood produced and the quality of the land for such use.'
There are presently about 100-120acres devoted to farming of corn.
2. Are there ar.y ;.nowr, n.ireral ci �eEat ciei,osits on the site? w0 XX iL
If yes, the tyt.t cand t' e acrEaaE.
There is approximately 20 acres of peat all of which will be located within
the park dedication areas.
3. Will the project result in an :_ncreas•_.i
Coml:lete the following as app ] i cable
a. Energy requirements (oil, electricit;, qa!3, coal, -2t=.)
Type
Estimated Pt -al. Ik�mand
Annual (Hourly c1 Daily)
P.equirement Summer winter
Anticirate6
Supplier
firn C',n'ract :-i
Interruptible ba,>is:'
Gas
Cannot b
innegasco
Oil
If
Flectrici
NSP REA of
Jordan
b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed on -site fuel storage.
Most likely none.
C. Estimate annual energy distribution for: N/A contingent upon resident firms.
space heating
air conditioning
ventilation
lighting $
processing $
d. specify any major energy conservation systems and/or equipment
incorporated into this project. None at this stage. Individual firms may be
interested in incorporating such systems at the time of contruction.
e. What secondary energy use effects may result from this project
(e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housing or businesses, etc)?
Will likely induce some new housing to accomodate workers and their -families which
in turn will cause growth in business sector. Impacts can also be expected in the
area of municipal services i.e. schools, water etc.
ii. OPEN SPTCE/RECREATION
1. Are there any'de�;ignated federal, state, county or local recreation nr
open space areas near the site (including wild and scenic rivers, trails,
lake accesses)7 NO XX YES
If yes, list areas by name and e.xplain ho•,�; each may be affected by the
p rcject. Indicate any measures to be use;, to reduce adverse impacts.
There is a municipal Park south of Lake Ann which might attract some of
the employees of the proposed development. But the proposed project also
calls for provision of trail system thru it and to the park.
I
- 7 -
fc'. arr c>.. " rc .� e�_�tI
..ill t.,u rc�e ct �: "' � "
i :1 :iwa✓, r. i 1roi �+aXtCI , a' 1 CI t i'tc) ,—t
I f y V.h Ch ;all
t!]eCli, L:XIstin,; us .3:c: (ciia[113C5, •1V •'c1q,' tr.1, iC C.
j e7 cCarlt a je of t1lick tl of f lc ( I f :U (j;1w•.i) inticate
affected by the Z,roject (e.g, cor.yc stlon, pert-=r;taoe of trueh traf f ic,
safety, increased traffic (hL'I ) , access requirements) .
Traffic volumes on County Road 17, existing and proposed; State Road
101 and.State Highway 5 will be increased by approximately 15,000 ADT
when construction is complete. The first phase alone will generate
approximately 5,000 ADT by 1984.
It is quite possible that several firms will use the Chicago Milwaukee
St. Paul & Pacific R.R. which bisects the site.
2. Is mass transit available to the .site? 1JO X YES
3. what measures, including transit and paratransit services, are planned to
reduce adverse impacts?
None at this time.
J. PLANNING, LAND USE, COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Is the project consistent with local and/or regional comprehensive
NO ; X YES
plans?
If not, explain:
i
If a zoning change or special use permit is necessary, indicate existing
zoning and change requested.
Existing zoning is R-IA, Agriculture -Residence District. Requesting
dhange to P-4, Planned Industrial District.
2. Will the type or 1,eight of the pr - j, ct c•�nfli ct with the :_haracter :- f the
existing neighborho )d?_N i 11 S
If yes, explain and deE ci ibc any measures i o be used to reduce con]) ict
The Chanhassen Guide Plan indicates that industrial use was planned'for
this area.
ski
How many e:::ricytEs
Hch much new housin will be neede,i
-„ Unkown at this time.
4 Will the project i n ; 1 c dt.-veloi ment
01 similar deve2or--m+-ni Yes
1 f exl+I a i n tyl -t ,.eVcl.opme,nt anr; j., - :: ny utl.,. t 1;1 t i C 1f.
municipalit ies a f f ec i ed
This cannot be ascertained at this time however as this site is centrally
located, ancillary services can be expected to develop in the City of
Chanhassen or along the Route 5 Corridor.
5. Is there sufficient capacity in the fc:livwin,g pabli.c servic s to handle
the project and any associated growth.
Amount required
Public Service for nroiect Sufficient capacity?
water
0.69 MGD gal/da
0.60 MGD gal/da
wastewater treatment
sewer
feet
schools
•gam pupils
unknown at tFli s
solid waste disposal
time tor, ir-.c
streets
miles
ether (police, fire, etc)
If current major public facilities are net adequate, do existing local
plans call for expansion, or is expansion necessary strictly for this
cne project and its associated impacts?
6. Is the project within a proposed or designated Critical Area or part
,Df a Related Actions L•IS of other environmentally sensitive plan or
program reviewed by the EQC? X NO YES
If ves, specify which area or plan.
Will the p,-ojoct invc,i;r the use, ti:ansp rtatio::, :;torage, releaEe
r disposal c- Tot,ni-aiiy hazardous or tc-xic laqulds, solids on
;asecus sul ,i anew Lu: ,h 15 pesticides, ar,> >:!c' iv, waste 1-3 si.,D:
t_C : X Ni _ y}
If yes, please spe : r, + ti.F Substance ra,..E J usage and any Tre.3
tc be taken tc miril':ize advErse envir+Jrme nraj _.-:marts from a_^_iden, s.
7
�r_
8. �:-ier, t:-ie j:rc;ect ha= serve:: eful life, will retircmcnt of
faciIat�- re.iuire s..,cial 7;e-s.;ure3 or clans? X
if yes, si.ecify:
K. HISTORIC RESOURCES
1. Are there any structures on the site older than 50 years or on federal
or state historical registers? X NO YES
2. Have any arrowheads, pottery or other evidence of prehistoric or early
settlement been found on the site? X NO YES
Might any known archaeologic or paleontological sites be affected
by the activity? X NO YES
3. List any site or structure identified in 1 and 2 and explain any
impact on them.
N/A
L. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
Describe any other major environmental effects which may not have been
identified in the previous sections. •
III. OTHER MITIGATIVE MEASURES
Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potential
adverse impacts that have not been described before.
1
V. FINEINGS
The project is af 1 i� at _ _.:n1c : _.3] f — �' t; - . ram_,• ... ii
(Person) , after con!7iJLc a' io- D'. - i ,f• i na . on :rn
in Minn. Rec. mF2- 25, makes the !,,]3okijig fir:djng�
1. The prcjr,r.t i S 1 i
Si
2. The project does (_ --
) CIO(., -;nut { _ ) have the potential for s i g-A l i rant
environmental effects.
State reasons:
3. (For private actions only.) The project is ( ) is not ( ) of more than
local significance.
State Reasons:
!V. CONCLUSIONS AND CERTIFICATION
NOTE: A Negative Declaration or EIS Preparation Notice is not officially filed
until the date of publication of the notice in the EQC Monitor section of
the Minnesota State Register. Submittal of the EAW to the EQC constitutes
a request for publication of notice in the EQC Monitor.
A. I, the undersigned, am either the authorized representative of the Responsible
Agency or the Responsible Person identified below. Based on the above findings,
the Responsible Agency (Person) makes the following conclusions. (Complete j
either I or 2) . !
1. NEGATIVE DECJ.kF.' TION NOTICE
No EIS is needc•d on U;i:: i roject, lbecau ce the project is not a
1
major action and/or does not have t Lie pot ent-_Lu:J
� �x3 / >> -i va t • .3 -t i �n = can �• • tip -
•iivi ronrier ta] e fe c' . i' ,t } Sr ;
project is nc;t of m _-I c thin local s i .3 ni f I -an(:c
i
INI
2. EIS PFi1:A1T,-cTl0N +OTICE
An EIS will be prepared on tnis :pro joct becausU t ne I.reject is a
major action and has toc potential fc.r si(-nificant environmental
effects. i'or i ri',/at%2 actions, the project i:> a],;(- cf more Char
local significance.
a. The t,F_)C pules provide that p.:ysi cal const ruc- ion cr Dp(:rat ion if tl.e
project must stop w ien an EIS is required. Li sl ecial circ umst antes,
the ^1E�2C caispecifically authorize limited construction to beyin or
continue. If you feel there are special circumstances in this
project, specify the extent of progres:3 recommended and the reasons.
b. Date Draft EIS will be submitted:
(month) (day) (year)
(MEQC Rules require that the Draft EIS be submitted within 120 days
of publication of the EIS Preparation Notice in the EQC Monitor. If
special circumstances prevent compliance with this time limit, a
written request for extension explaining the reasons for the request
must be submitted to the EQC Chairman.)
C. The Draft EIS will be prepared by (list Responsible Agency(s) or
Person(s)):
t
Signature
- t
Title
Date
B. Attach an affidavit certifying the date that copies of this EAW were mailed
to all points on the official EQC distribution list, to the city and county
directly impacted, and to adjacent counties or municipalities likely to be
directly impacted by the proposed action (ref °r to question III.J.4 on }gage 9
of the EAW). The affidavit need be attached -ily to the copy of the EAW
which is sent to the EQC.
C. Billing procedure for E2q Monitor Publication
State aqe r} .At t a-Ji to the EAW sett to t.hc EgC a com}Aeted OSI: ; M
ONLY: fonn (State. Register General Order F(_ rm--available at
^tnrc s 1 For instructions, pleasc contact your Agency':-
] of l i r t_- the State F.e_gia' l r th ): i i • F tlu
i
(C 2)827-5-893 _
Land Planning
Ern i,onmental Planning
Urban Design
. Graphic Design
Note Plumber 1
Chanhassen Lakes Business F,-r,k LAM
An indirect source permit for air pollution is likely to be needed on
the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park development.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency sets a cutoff number of 2000 parking
spaces. Any development creating more than this number require an indirect
source permit. On'the basis of data distributed by the ULI, industrial
parks generate approximately 17 workers per gross acre. This project
contains 240.1 acres of industrial land which should produce around 4100
workers. The Chanhassen ordinance requires 1+ spaces per worker. Hence
it is reasonable to assume that the project will easily exceed the cutoff
point.
One option may be the use of phased development to reduce the number of
parking spaces being considered at any one time to a point below the
cutoff.
2614 Nicollet Avenue/ Minneapolis Minnesota 55408
Note
•
SUMMARY
OF TRIP GENERATION RATES
Land Use/Building Type _
ITE Land Use Code
Independent Variable —Trips per
Average
Trip Maximum
Rate Rate
!Number
Minimum Correlation of
Rate Coefficient Studies
Average Size of
Independent
Variable/Study
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends
59.9
441.2
3.5
87
Peak A.M.
Enter
Hour Between
1
Exit
of 7 and 9
Total
9.3
124.0
0.5
66
Adjacent
P.M.
Enter
Street
Between
Exit
Traffic
4 and 6
Total
12.0
148.0
0.6
62
Peak
A.M-
Enter
Hour
Exit
}
of
Total
11.5
124.0
0.5
84
Generator
P.M.
Enter
Exit
Total
,
10.0
148.0
0.6
Saturday Vehicle
Trip Ends
;
Peak
Enter
Hour of
Exit
Generator
Total
Sunday Vehicle Trip Ends
i
Peak Enter
-
t
—
—
Hour of
Exit
Generator
Total
Source Numbers
ITE Technical Committee 6A-6--Tnp Gene;a:iGn Rate=
Date: 1975
No RTH
0 1 2 3 4 'SHIL.�s
Lake Min
7
hanhassen C y Limit#�
17 �I
2site
L.
koo�/ Ili,. ,/
1.694
Pls CB
62
1.494
1.35W
Chanhassen Lakes Qusiness Park
Metro Setting
LAW OFFICES
GRANNIS, CAMPBELL, FARRELL & KNUTSON
DAVID L. GRANNIS - 1874-1961 PROFFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
DAVID L. GRANNIS, JR. 1910-1980 POST OFFICE BOX 57
VANCE B. GRANNIS 4D3 NORWEST BANK BUILDING
VANCE B. GRANNIS, JR. 161 NORTH CONCORD EXCHANGE
THOMAS J. CAMPBELL
PATRICK A. FARRELL SOUTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55075
DAVID L. GRANNIS, III
ROGER N. KNUTSON 612-405-1661
THOMAS M. SCOTT
GARY C. FUCHS
MARY S. VUJOVICH October 12, 1984
THOMAS L, GRUNDHOEFER
DAVID L. HARMEYER
Mr. William Monk
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P . 0. Box 1-4-7--f -
Chaajen, MN 55317
FEE:. Chanhassen Lakes
Dear Bill: -
Business Park 3rd Addition
RECEI-VED
Clr- .OF CHANHASSEN.
Roger Knutson gave me the original documents for filing
with respect to the now satisfied attorney's lien of Julius
C. Smith against Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. These original
documents were not only necessary to record against the Certifi-
cates of Title you had Roger give me as to Outlots A, B, C,
E and J of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park but are also necessary
to be filed against the Outlot C Chanhassen Lakes Business Park
3rd Addition which is in the City's name. That Outlot C is the
one that you have had me work on with Alscor Investors as to
the change in boundary lines between our two lots.
I have been in touch with Thomas Burke of Opus Corporation
who manages Alscor. He was waiting for these original Attorney's
Lien Satisfaction documents so that we could exchange Quit Claim
Deeds to remove the boundary line problem. He is now having
Alscor Investors execute a Quit Claim Deed to the City of Chan-
hassen as to all of Outlot C (with the new boundary line having
been platted as a part of that 3rd Addition) and as soon as
that has been signed he will furnish it to me for recording.
We also have a deed that the City must sign as to all of Outlot
B (using the new boundary line as platted in the 3rd Addition)
in favor of Alscor. Enclosed is that deed for execution by the
Mayor and City Clerk. Would you please ask Mr. Ashworth to have
this deed signed and have the City seal stamped on it and return-
ed to me. I will coordinate the recording of all of the original
deeds and the original Attorney's Lien Satisfaction documents
at one time.
As soon as the documents have been recorded at the Registrar
of Titles' Office, you will be returned the Certificates of
Mr. William Monk
Page Two
October 12, 1984
Title as to Outlots A, B, C, E and J of Chanhassen Lakes Business
Park and the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title as to Outlot
C of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 3rd Addition.
If you have any questions about the deed or about our proce-
dure please give me a call. Hopefully within the next couple
of weeks we will have this all taken care of for you.
Very truly yours,
GRANNIS, CAMPBELL, FARRELL
& KNUTSON, P.A.
By: ti(AAM,14,
Ma y S. V, ujovi ,h
E J
MSV/mmo �J
Enclosure
Corporation
Claim Deed. \filler -Davis Co., \[innc.ipolis
Quit Claion a Corporation. OYiA NO. �1— .
blinncsor.. ,i(orm Convcc.mcun! Blanks (Itcviscd 1977)
TW_4 labruture, Alade this......................................................day of ............. Octo..er........... _...., 16B.4.......,
between................ Qily... of ... Chanhas.S.......................... ............................................................................................... ... .................... .....
municipal
a/corporation under the laws of the State of ......... inn�,so•_a-.--•--,•• party of the fcrst part, and
Alscor....Investors Joint ...Venture..-No-..•...2.,.....a••••gen•a .al....Pa. j p pmppsQ.d.... f %;
a 2in under the laws of the State of .......... Minz asata.......................................................................................................
party of the second part,
M. itncz-getb, That the said party of the first part, in consideration of the sum of
One Dollar ($1.00) and other good...and., valuable..,•c.onsd,•ra.,.Oz7--�����g�
to it in hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,
does hereby Grant, .Bargain, Quitclaim, and Convey unto the said party of the second part, its successors
and assigns, Forever, all the tract ......... ...or parcel......... of land lying and being in the County of ........................
Carver and State of Minnesota, described as follows, to -wit:
All of Outlot B, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 3rd Addition, accord-
ing to the recorded plat thereof now on file with the Office of the
Registrar of Titles in and for Carver County, Minnesota.
State of jftnootat
County o Carver ......
...............
The foregoing instrument 7vas acknowledsed before me
this.... �! day of ...................... ............................................. 19...8.4...........
Thomas... Hamilton ,.....Mayor.................................................................................................................................................................
by .................... .......
(NAME OF OFFICER OR AGENT, TITLE OF OFFICER OR AGENT)
Don Ashworth, City Clerk
and by...........................................................................................................................................................................
....................................
(NAME . . . . OF . .. OFFICER .....
OR AGENT . . . ..
T. TITLE ......
OF OFFI...CER OR AGENT)
.....................................................................................................................
of........the....C.�.ty.....�.f....Chanh.as.s.(~n ............................
(NAME OF CORPORATION ACKNOWLEDGING)
- municipal__............•.......................................corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
OPUS CORPORATION
♦ DESIGNERS • BUILDERS • DEVELOPERS
October 8, 1984
Ms. Mary S. Vujovich
Grannis, Campbell, Farrell & Knutson
P. 0. Box 57
403 Norwest Bank Building
161 North Concord Exchange
South St. Paul, Minnesota 55075
Re: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Third Addition
Dear Ms. Vujovich:
I have enclosed a proposed Quit Claim Deed for execu-
tion by the City of Chanhassen for transferring that part
of Outlot B to Alscor. I have simultaneously sent to Ameri-
can Linen Supply Co., a partner in Alscor, a Quit Claim Deed
for transferring that certain part of Outlot C to the City.
Upon execution by American Linen Supply Co., I will obtain
Opus's execution and send same to you with a certificate of
Real Estate Value for recordation along with the City's
Deed.
Sincerely,
_j 0, &A0::1
M, Burke
TMB:cl
Enclosure
MINNEAPOLIS • CHICAGO • PHOENIX • MILWAUKEE
EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 800 OPUS CENTER 0 9900 BREN ROAD EAST 0 P.O. BOX 150 • MINNFAPOI IS MINNFSf1TA SSddf1 IR19% 019-ddnn
MARY ELLIS PETERSON
LEGAL ASSISTANT
OF COUNSEL
HARVEY E. SKAAR
MARK C. MCCULLOUGH
RiTSSELL H. LAHSox
ATTORNEY AT LAW
1900 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
Donald W. Ashworth
City Manager
Chanhassen City Offices
City Hall
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Don:
September 24, 1984
Re: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park
TELEPHONE
e 12) 333 - I51 1
Enclosed please find original discharge of notice of
lis oendens and original satisfaction of attorney's lien for re-
gistration on Certificates of Title No. 13478 and 13479 covering
the above referenced property. Your staff should immediately
undertake to register these documents on the indicated certifi-
cates and then advise Attorney George .X. Connor, 1008 Soo Line
Building, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55402-1270, of the cost of the
registration fees, which he will pay, Quite frankly, I do not
believe that there will be any charges, as recording fees are
not collected from governmental subdivisions.
Very truly yours.
RUSSELL H. ARSON
'r
ar,�l is e erson
Legal Assistant
MEP
Encl.
cc, Bill Monk, City Engineer
kG(;77 _j
. EP 1984
"'Ty Qr' CHANHAS::
Dischargf of Notice of Lin Pendens. 1
PartiaMiller-Davis Co., Minneapolis
Partialor Complete Form NO. %—M Minnesota Uniform Conve•vaneing Blanks Q 14-91 t
State of Minnesota, SS.
County of CARVER
District Court,
FIRST Judicial District
Julius C. Smith
vs. Plaintiff
Lake Susan Hills a Minnesota partnership et a -
Defendant s
KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, That the undersigned _ Julius A. Coller, II Attorney
for Plaintiff
do es hereby certify that a certain Notice of Lis Pen dens, in the above entitled action, which has been pending in
the above named Court, and which affected, involved and brought in question the real estate, situate in the
County of Carver and State of Minnesota, described as follows, to -wit:
Outlots A, B, C, E, H and J, "CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK", according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the Carver County Recorder.
and which was filed for record in the office of the County Recorder of said County of Carver
on the 30 day of November , 19 82 , and recorde Book 40 of
Torr n files on page 233 & 234 , aw Cert of Titles #1 '14 im eyl �IA-hereby discharged and
said action has been dismissed so far as it pertains to the above described real property. Andthe County Recorder
of said County is hereby authorized and directed to discharge the same upon the record thereof, according to the
statute in such case made and provided.
IN TESTI�JONY WHEREOF, The undersigned ha s hereunto set his hand— this
�- day of Januar)r 19_
State of Minnesota, SS.
County of SCOTT
On this ;2 S day of January 19-& , before me,
a - notary o tbl i within and for said County, personally appeared
Julius A. Coller II Attorney for Plaintiff
to me known to be the person_ described in, and who executed -the foregoing instrument,
lsee motel and acknowledged that die_ executed
the same as hi G free act and deed
[See Motel
Al,
;iy-co.nmi s 0.1c
S
S1GNr�TI'RF. OFNO� PUBLIC OR OTHFR OFFICIALOR OTHFR OFFICIAL
NOTE: The hlank liars marker) "tier Nele•' ore for u.cr a hrn the instrument is exmutcd by nn atturnev.
SATISFACTION OF ATTORNEY'S LIEN
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the certain Attorney's
Lien now owned by the undersigned, the statement and claim for
which bears the date of December 23rd, 1981, and executed by the
undersigned, and which was filed in the Office of the Registrar
of Titles in and for the County of Carver and State of Minnesota,
on the 31st day of December, 1981 and memorialized on Certificates
of Title No. 12927 and 12928 in Volume 38 at pages 313 and 314,
respectively, as Document No. 34455 is fully satisfied, released
and discharged, the debt claimed therein having been paid in full.
And the County Registrar of Titles in said County is hereby
authorized and directed to discharge the same upon the record
thereof, according to the statutes in such case made and provided.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the undersigned has hereunto set his
hand this 12th day of January, 1984.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
12th day of January, 1984, by Julius C. Smith.
ELLEN M. GLOOD
NOTARY PUBLIC MINNESOTA
HENNEPINCOUNTY r Notary Public
My Commission Expires Mar. 1,1988 y
r tt
THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY:
Julius C. Smith
7101 York Avenue South
Suite 215
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435
(612)921-3385
a
LAW OFFICES
GRANNIS, CAMPBELL, FARRELL & KNUTSON
DAVID L. GRANNIS - 1874-1961 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
DAVID L. GRANNIS, JR. - 1910-1980
POST OFFICE BOX 57
VANCE B. GRANNIS 403 NORWEST BANK BUILDING
VANCE B. GRANNIS, JR. 161 NORTH CONCORD EXCHANGE
THOMAS J. CAMPBELL
PATRICK A. FARRELL SOUTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55075
DAVID L. GRANNIS, III
ROGER N. KNUTSON 612-455-1661
ROBERT R. KING, JR.
THOMAS M.SCOTT
GARY G. FUCHS
MARY S. VUJOVICH
THOMAS L. GRUNDHOEFER
Mr. Thomas Burke
Legal Department
Opus Corporation
9900 East Bren Road
Minnetonka, MN 55343
April 26, 1984
RE: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 3rd Addition
Dear Mr. Burke:
- As we discussed over the telephone this morning enclosed
you will find copies of the plat map from Chanhassen Lakes
Business Park Addition and Chanhassen Lakes Business Park
3rd Addition. The Carver County Registrar of Titles Office
furnished me those plat maps to show where the difference
in boundary lines appears. That office feels that if a quit
claim deed as to Outlot B was given by the City to Alscor
and a quit claim deed from Alscor to the City as to Outlot
C would be sufficient to clear up the title -to each of those
outlots.
I understand that you are drafting the necessary deeds
but are waiting right now for title work on the property.
When you have checked the title, and have completed the deed,
I would appreciate it if you would contact me. If you want
to send me the deed to be signed by the City, I will see that
it gets signed.
If you need any further assistance on this or have any
questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. Thank
you very much.
MSV/rrano
Very truly yours,
GRANNIS,. CAMPBELL, FARRELL
& KNUTSON, P.A.
By
Mary S. Vujovich
RECE1VcD
Enclosures
cc: Mr, William Monk
City Engineer
APR 2 i 1984
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
September 18, 1984
Opus Corporation
Attn: Ms. Michelle
800 Opus Center
9900 Bren Road East
Box 150
CITYOF
CHASHASSt7-
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
Foster
Minneapolis, Mn 55440
Dear Ms. Foster:
The City Engineer, Bill Monk, has forwarded your letter of August
16, 1984, to this office.
This office cannot approve your request to terminate your
existing letters of credit within the Business Park. Although
the City has the utmost regard for Opus and does not question the
financial strength of Alscor, approval of the request would be
contrary to longstanding policies of the City. Further, if the
City were to consider this type of request, we would assuredly
receive similar requests from all other developers within the
community. Without question, Opus' letters of credit are signi-
ficantly higher than those on file for smaller building projects,
smaller lot developments, etc.
You have the right to appeal this decision to the Chanhassen City
Council. Please notify me as to whether you wish to see this
item placed on a future Council agenda.
Sincerely,
& C"-J��
Don Ashworth
City Manager
DAX
qp OPUS CORPORATION
DESIGNERS • BUILDERS • DEVELOPERS
August 16, 1984
Mr. William Monk
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Mr. Monk:
Alscor Investor's Joint Venture currently has outstanding with the City of
Chanhassen two letters of credit for $800,000 and $400,000 respectively which
are scheduled to remain in effect until mid-1985.' While Alscor fully under-
stands the original rationale for the requirement, we feel the financial strength
and track record which has been exhibited since that time justifies their elimi-
nation.
We would appreciate consideration of this request by the City at their earliest
convenience.
Sincerely,
Michele Foster
Assistant Director
Real Estate Development
MF/rr
cc: Mark Rauenhorst
John Hilliard
RECZi_v'Z;' ,
AUG 1 71984
CITY OF CHANHASSE-1
MINNEAPOLIS • CHICAGO • PHOENIX • MILWAUKE-E
EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 600 OPUS CENTER • 9900 BREN ROAD EAST 9 P.O. BOX 150 0 MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55440 (612) 936-4444
zgngTabuTTx Aux
NUOW TITS
ggaomlgs ' uoQ : o0
LIu : MS
aauuuTd AgTO
TagTsM qog
'ATaaaouTg
•uoTgaaad000
anoA -Tog noA xusgs •Tpsodoad anon ssnosTp og.noA ggTM goauz
og paTb aq pTnoM I ';o aaao uaxpg aq uaO tuaTgoad sTgg Mog oq sa
Tasodoad a padoTaAap aAsg noA ua-gM •uoTgdo pu000s ao gsaT; agq
aaggTa ansand noA gagg saa;aad AgTO agg 'suospaa snoTAgo aoa
• sgsoo anTgnagsTUTtupP
buTpnTouT gans ao3 ATgoaatp noA TTTq Pup aouauaquTauz
Aa'2sSaoau agg gnoAaaao uasspguagO go AgTO agg guns •£
:puu 'sTsaq auTnbaa P uo
aousuaguTPUI aoj saoTAaas goaaquoo ATagnnTad noA gpgy •Z
'aaag
aouauaquTaiu aau Aagg gPgq os sAPMAaqua agg ubtsapag •T
:Gap gDTgM 'pauTPquTPui aaa sApMAagua asagg gsgq aanssa pTnoM
gorgM suoTgdo aaagg aq. oq saaadd� ATquasaad aaags •xaed
ssauTsng saNpq uassaguagO og suaTpaui Aaqua agg go uoTgTpuoo
pamooabun agq buTpaabaa squTPTduioo paATaoaa ssg AgTO ags
:pg apaa
S£il55 NK 'sTTodpauuTW
anTaQ buTXTA 0t'6t,
•auI •quz6W agL-gsH TPag uuna
uuna p3 •aW
T86T 'LZ gsnbnV
0061-LE6 (Z L9)
Lt699 ` iOS3NNIW 'N3SSdHNdHO • L17L X08 'O d • 3Alaa H311noo 069
120SYRIVE0
0
Q�- J)�7
.-Jf3G IN WclG i3A-'
18610 9 OfIV
N3SS HNVHO jo Ali3
sllnsa r pun and dill ut .1allaq uana aJnpo rd of uo11vz1uvff load s?gl 1Jadxa djluap?fuoJ
PddO.lua aavg aM suorinla.r ssautsnq 1ua11aJxa pun aJuaplfuoJ agl alv?Ja,dddv aAl
pub aJuvutf `dlgsraun-to fo 9.1a11vtu v u1 'uollv.rlslultupv
11 pun luapuadapul uv sv alveado 1p,K f111ua gJv7
11?H uoJvag
r
slq- `H a)lv7 svtuogl
lsa,rod d-rngJaluvD
uo11?ppV lsV poomBpaAl
puvl,Kopvayy
saivls,7 do111?H
: s1Jalo,cd
808Z-S'F8 Q7[9)
datuzuW 'J don.1g
M'SS vlosauutly 's?lodvauulpV
Ifp.rvH 'Q ddUpo y
809 a1?nS anjd(j 8u14!11 ot,6t,
uosu?-luvH uqo`
AIOIZ NdocrMoD vlv)v.7IS
sf'u?plog dS'dgl
a�vuvur o1 uollv.rodroD vuua?S*
sll?H uvsng a Yv7
salelJossv g1noS uoigu?xa7
'Jul 'g1noS u01�u?xa7
*a8u?ploH puv7
lS16 LZ6 (Zl9)
SFt+SS vlosau'W 'vu1p,7
aJv.r.[aj .Idddf) LI8Y n.r•rn satuv`
dnl6'dLllO7 LrVdW.LS.7i1AIl ?l6'S I1lII'
PFF uvtlD
.)l.rvd ssautsng saxv7 uassvguval j
salv?Jossv x,rvd al,itval-lJvlg
Jul X,md -Y`+tvwyjvlg
•Jul ` J'D D v
:S-"ulploll puv7
8v`•Sl �F�' �c I9)
SFfSS vlosauu?K 's?lodvautr?y�
009 al?nS 'an1.1a fur y?A Oi6f JAII `LA1.7m7JdATvK d.L6'.LS.7 7VYy vvaQ
:sMollof sv S•a1111ua adv.lvdas dddlll olur S'iUdWdojanap puv sluau[lsanut
purl cnofo uo?�vzluv�doaJ �ulMollofaLll fo llo'fastnpv of pasvaldst d-unj :y uunQ