78-02 - South Lotus Lake Add SUB pt 1CITY OF 1es��
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE•P 0. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINN ESOTA55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: April 16, 1979
TO: Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Assistant Manager/Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: South Lotus Lake Addition, Proposed Preliminary Development
Plan Review
APPLICANT: Bloomberg Companies, Inc. and Robert Davis
PLANNING CASE: P-566
In November, 1978, the Planning Commission was in the process of
reviewing substantially different development plans for the subject
property which included a 60 unit hotel and 12 unit apartment proposal.
Major issues from that plan to the present plan are that both the
hotel and apartment proposals have been discontinued, and that a
radically different development plan has been drafted which proposes
double units along the west and southern perimeters, and has resulted
in a more circular road pattern. The present proposal has 36 single
family residential units proposed and 20 double units.
The applicant should be advised that plans pursuant to section 7 and
of subdivision ordinance 33 should be developed before any further
review of the subject proposal. Because of the magnitude of the
changes between this plan and the previous plan, it is probable that
all of the plan review processes must be gone through again with
the possible exception of the environmental assessment worksheet.
Staff will be receiving a determination on that regard shortly from
the Environmental Quality Council.
On the westerly lot 3 of the proposed plan, it is shown as a typical
duplex unit. I believe it is the intent of the applicant to demonstrate
that type of unit only on those lots having a double frontage situation
east of Erie Avenue. In the general vicinity of these lots, it is
my recommendation that a street connection be made from either Erie
Avenue or West 77th Street into the proposed development in order to
alleviate the single entrance problems. I additionally recommend
that provisions for the connection of Hill Street to the proposed
development be made in order to terminate a dangerous access situation
from Hill Street onto TH 101.
Planning Commissic -2- April 16, 1979
Staff should analyze the potential common outlot/residential conflict
and render an opinion as to how an effective development contract might
be drawn that wotld mitigate any of these potential conflicts. Along
with this opinion should be a recommendation on the need for a con-
servation easment along Lotus Lake and the methods of control for
the common outlot on Lot 8 in the north portion of the development.
Recommendation
I recommend that the Planning Commission advise the applicant to prepare
plans pursuant to ordinance that incorporate the changes in the latest
plan, receive watershed district recommendations, and consult with
staff concerning the street connections, public hearings, and
environmental assessment work sheet.
0 o130 a
u■ [][ti
vLake Lucy
��OQ -Lj
QOO�ODp � � �O�ti dog
Ik-�sj
■ oo nca can oo s
oornicElin�n000
oQ no r]o 13
mqq
U
_
-.�
1�,; - LLB}% �•
��-�
b
-LWJ
• �
L
\\� �f/
�
.F
e
I
OF
PK
Lake Susan
--
Rice
`t
Marsh
Lake
OFF
••
.F
.F
-
O•F
.F
.F I
OF
34��
Co► imAr,lb
(Lccct+to n
Minnesota
Environmental Quality Board
100 Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
St, Paul, Minnesota 55101
Phone 296-8253
7
F.,
December 18, 1978
William McRosti e Robert Wai bel
Bloomberg Companies, Inc. Planner, City of Chanhassen
West 78th Street 7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: South Lotus Lake Addition
We have received a letter from John E. Mel by today ( December 18, 1978)
withdrawing the petition for an environmental impact statement (EIS)
on the South Lotus Lake Addition. Due to this, the Environmental
Quality Board (EQB) will take no further action on this petition and
the informational meeting scheduled for December 19, 1978 is can-
celled.
Sincerely,
, J-� �' , , � u- L'�" ,
Sharon Decker
Environmental Planner
SD/dh
cc: John Melby
Wes Arseth
John Segner
DEG 1978 ,
RECF.JVW
1 VIL4,AGE an CID.
CHANMAA39
MINX
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Minnesota
- Environmental Quality ward
100 Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
a: St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Prone
MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD
MEETING
Thursday, November 16, 1978
Room 15, State Capitol
9:00 a.m.
Proposed Agenda
I. Review and approve proposed agenda
II. Review and approve minutes
III. Environmental Review Program
A. Petition Challenge to EA14 negative declaration
orb
1978
DECEIVED
VIW Ace)G on
CHAt4M ,
1. Ham Lake Campground - staff proposed findings and conclusions
'2. South Lotus Lake addition - Chanhassen
B. B. Petitions for Environmental Impact Statements
1. Cono Zoo renovation and expansion - staff proposed findings
and conclusions
2. Sabin Wastewater Treatment facility - staff proposed findings
and conclusions
C. LIJ RCV�3Cri
1. Northern Pipeline Final EIS, informational booklet, DNR permit conditons,
memorandum of understanding
IV. Power Plant Siting Program
A. CU-TR-2 - alteration to construction permit to allow other structure types on
angles of greater than 10 degrees - staff proposed findings and conclusions
B. MPIRG Petition to Revoke Construction Permit for CU-TP,-I - staff report and
recommendations
C. CPA/UPA application for minor route alterations - CU-TR-2
D. HSP exemption application - Granite Falls substation - to tap existing 230 kV
line - approximately 800 feet
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
�q
� �iii` nesot
Env 'Ironr ',P, n1a!
cDuality- '
100 Capital Square Bo:ldinc
550 Cedar Str-:)et
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Phone 296-8253
November 16, 1978
Mr. John Malby
7540 Chanhassen Road
Excelsior, MN 55331
Robert Waibel
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: South Lotus Lake Addition
nscFgvto
N vttG� 6>r •.a�
,CHANHgsSli�i , ,
t+urtw. ///
6'49 / r
William McRostie
Bloomberg Companies, Inc.
West 73th Street
Chanhassen, MN 55317
It has been agreed that an informational meeting will be held con-
cerning the proposed South Lotus Lake Addition. At this meeting all
parties will be allowed to present their evidence indicating whether
or not an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is needed on this
project. Following this meeting, staff will prepare findings of
fact and recommended conclusions for the Environmental Quality Board
(EQB). The Board will then make a decision on the need for.an EIS.
The informational meeting.has been scheduled for December 19, 1978
at 7:00 p.m. in the Chanhassen Elementary School, 7600 Laredo Drive,
Chanhassen, Minnesota.
In order to determine the need for an EIS, the project must be shown
to be 1) a major action with 2) the potential for significant environ-
mental effects. The criteria for determining whether or not the
project is a major action and whether or not it has potential for
significant environmental effects are contained in the Rules for the
EQB. I have -attached the re'levant portions of the Rules.
Please note that only these criteria will be considered by the Board in
making its decision. Therefore, it is very important that these criteria
be addressed in your testimony. Information presented.in your case should
be verified by studies, reports, or expert witnesses whenever possible.
I have scheduled an inspection of the site for December 12, 1978 at 9:00
a.m. Tom Rulland, who will chair the informational meeting; Doug Blom-
gren, Special Assistant Attorney General to the EQB; and I will view
the site of the proposed project at that time. Although we will be
merely inspecting the site and will not be taking testimony at that time,
all parties are invited to be present.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
s Page 2 1
Please contact me as soon as possible if y.c-u have any problems with
these dates or if you have any questions concerning the criteria
and your testimony.
Sincerely,
ems•: ,�lf'
' 1
-Sharon Decker
Environmental Planner
S D/ dh
cc: Wes Arseth
John Segner
0 CS 17 Of forest
b;��CollvcrsiOn 4c�:,.
chfferc,lt land (Loocf al);0 or C acrct: C', forest
coy t o a
cl Consti-tiction of clectrj
for, Or Capable of'\op,r Uk
ati0i) Lt7 's
tts (elec-
of 2',-).,D cir
�PCA);
d, Construction
of\f,clectTic transmission lines _d
desi.ened for, or Capable 0
to facilities
1�c or '-POre, or F I
-ITOvolis are
_U
01 rnoce �E Q J "'011s or
Construction of
plants and facilities
(PCA).
2. An EAW may be pre P d on anY-,PrOposed action to determine if
the action is a major action ith thf, nrjt�,,F[1, for ��j,
a_ 0,
effects and fora pr' 'o if ff -:i' ery
D
lVate a
C. W'aiverof EAlX"
Ir cases where the FrIagnitu&'and
pact of a project OW a RcsponsiL,',- -, �%�n environmental ir.
termine that a� elS is necessary with' or Resp�3,qsible Person to de -
federal aaenpjf is preparing a state without Preparation ONn EANV or if
EAIV ne ElS Pursuant to 6 -NMCA J'Z\k 3.0-25' F.4., an
not be Prepared. Publication of the
F,Oired. In cases where the ResponsibleEIS PrePnrlti - N
be re 1 ice shall
Abency is not e Oposer, if
Project proposer does not concur in the determination. or need t(. an EIS
,Without the Preparation of an EAW, the a' Y shall prepa7c
o� C r __ z , air ASIi
§ 3-02S Actions requiring environmental impact statemej-.rs
1.
A. General criteria. An EIS shall be required whenever it is determined
that an action is major -and has the Potential for significant environmental
effects- In making this determination, material effects on the environmental
variables specified in 6 MCAR § 3.030 A.3. will indicate that an EIS should
be prepared. In the case of a Private action, it must also be determined that
the action is Of more than local significance.
13. Major action. In determining whether an action is major, the following
factors shall be considered-
L Type of action;
2. Scope O'faction, including sizc and cost;
I Location and
nature Of Surr -,.---.-,ding area;
4- The totality of cumulative *
§ 3.025. E.; re actions, as defined by 6 AICAR
5. Relation Of the action to anticipated ;Co,.Vth and development; and
6. Permit(,) and aPPrOYal(s) required in addition to those of One pri-
MarY, local agency.
C. f-ocal significance.
l deterr more than local significancrel Major pr
the follow"
Ing factors shall be coJv*ate nsideredaction is of:
10
PEA
duality Count.
1
e
h MCAR 5 .3_02i
lit
1_ Location of i,e s?cti,c:
2. Area affected by the action.
D. Potential for significant environmental effects. In determining whether
an action has the potential for significant environmental e.`iects, the following
factors shall be considered: `
1. Typo, extent, and rc-versibility of enviro-1—Mcat._i efte;:ts;
2. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future actions,
as defined by 6 MCAR § 3.025 E.;
3. T.-C`..Jilt t0 t?2,� envc,)nmci'.t_'.' iJ
tion by on,oina public regulatory authority; and
4. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and
controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public
agencies or the project proposer, or of EISs previously prepared on similar
actions.
E. Related actions.
1. When two or more actions are related, they shall be considered as a
single action and their cumulative potential effects on the em°ironment shall
be considered in determining whether an EIS is'required. Actions are related
if:
a. They are of a similar type, and are planned or will occur at the
l same time, and will affect the same geographic area; or
b. They are interdependent and not indeoer.dently viable stages or
segments of development of the same pro;Oct an—' not be undertaken
if subsequent stages or segments would not also occur; or
c. It can be determined, based on a comprehensive plan or on the
precedent that would be established by a public agency's undertaking or ap-
proving an action, that one of the actions will induce other actions of the
same type or affecting the same geographic area.
2. A comprehensive plan for a geographic area or other public agency
overall program or plan document may be considered as a Related Actions
EIS.
a. The geographic area must contain possible actions each with the
potential for significant environmental effects or actions whose cumulative
potential environmental effect is significant.
b. For an individual action in the geographic area, the need for an
individual action EIS or a modification of the Related Actions EIS shall be
judged by the guidelines for a Subsequent EIS.
3. A Related Actions EIS shall meet the content requirement of
6 MCAR § 3.030 D.; however, the data may be more generalized and not as
exhaustive as an individual actior, EIS. A: litio-a_ ti:e u. rn.,t;;es m be
ay
more in the nature of prototypes or alternate scenarios.
F. Miscellaneous.
1. Subsequent EIS. When an LiS has been prepared on an action, no
ll
P . t-
. Z '
kit. .
ironinclit'll Qualit"
a. Ecological Effects Oupo�r_P'ybysonn'' 'fldlitc'
b. Environmental Hazards (toxic materials, tloodplains, steep slopes,
geologic hazards);
c. Water Quality a,-'(] Qunntit%' rsurEcc and ground water impacts);
d. Resource Conservation, Energy, and Usage (agricultural or forest
sources and
lands, minerals, energy e - -�, -., 1. Services (compatibility with plans,
Planning, Land T_Js�,, Ct mr,. unity Ser Z
regional impacts, population,
f. Open Space and FL&Tal, state, local);
g. Historic Resources Itlandw.--r"s (federal or state), historic sites,
archaeologic sites, paleontologic sjLL:sj
h. Air Quality (pollutants);
i. Noise (vibration and se,.mrj);
j. Other Environmental Ccnce.rns.
Mitigation of adverse environmental effects.
itiga ion 0' adverse
S. Fin as and certification (pli-,acc or -�ov.:rrnneintal action ime for
ce
rtification
EIS preparation, QC distribution cerfiffication).
N 'e tive
B. Content of ative Declaration Notice. Each lie tive Declaration
Notice shall include:
1. A brief description fthe proposed action..
2. A statement that no EIS --'is reqtuired be;?z(use the action is not a major
action with the potential for signi n e , vq 11 mental effects, and in the case
of private actions is not of more t significance, supported by reasons.
a
f of ' env:
n h,n c,
3. Where the EAW and supp xd-qSiC__umentation is available for pub-
lic inspection and copying.
C. Content of EIS Prepara ' n Notice. Eac�h Preparation Notice shall
include:
1. A brief descri on of the action requiring the EIIII'�\
inspection
Content
h
0
t
e
n
n
r
a
tand of
c E
E copying.
S
A
y
P
n
r
g'
p
n
a
d
e e he 'a ra
e 5
u Pp 0 'r Notice.
COA brief d'scri on of the action 0
2. The Resp Bible Agency or R-2-,ponsible_ Person for EIS preparation..
e y which \thact,
3. The re rnmended time requirements for preparation.
e I
4. Re mmendations3 if applicable. as to the extent to which t action
I
IS .0 s'
may ' pros d during the EIS process.
W r
r e
5 Where the EAW and su.- is available for public
V insp- tion and copying.
D. Content of Draft FIS. A D_-afr EIS shill cozitaia the following in-
2 3
0
November 7, 1978
Ms. Sharon Decker
Environmental Quality Board
Room"100
Capital Square Building
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
Dear Sharon:
I have received correspondence from your office informing us that
the.Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the South Lotus Lake
Addition has received a petition for Environmental Impact Statement.
As per our telephone conversation of November 3, 1978, I am
indicating at this time that the City of Chanhassen prefers the
informational meeting format for Environmental Quality Council
determination of need for an Environmental Impact Statement.
Please notify us of any, appropriate information that may be prepared
by our staff for this review process.
Sincerely,
Bob Waibel
Assistant City Planner
BW:k
Mr. Robert Waibel
Assistant City Planner
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, Minnesota
MI N N ESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
55317
690 Cedar Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 . 612-296-2747
November 6, 1978
RE: Environmental Assesment Worksheet
South Lotus Lake Addition
Carver County, Minnesota
MHS Referral File Number G437
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above project.
It has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given the State
Historic Preservation Officer by the National Historic Preservation Act
of 1966 and the Procedures of the National Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (36CFR800).
This review reveals the location of no properties of historic, architectural,
or cultural significance within the proposed project area. There are no
known sites of archaeological significance within the proposed project area.
Results from archaeological surveys conducted throughout the state indicate
a high correlation between prehistoric archaeological sites and permanent
natural water sources, such as lakes and streams, that exist or did exist
in the past. Since there is an absence of specific archaeological information
for the project area, and the development involves over 900 feet of Lotus
Lake shoreline in an area presently used for agriculture, we recommend that
a survey be conducted. Such a survey would determine the existence of any
sites, their eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places, and
the possible effects on them from the proposed activity. Should you have
information which you believe is relevant to the need for a survey -- do
you know, for example, if the area has been extensively altered since
prehistoric people may have lived there -- please do not hesitate to contact
Ms. Susan Queripel, Environmental Assesment Officer, State Historic Preservation
Office, James J. Hill House, 240 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55102,
phone (612) 296-0103, with that information.
NOV 1978
RECEIVED
VILLAGE ON
1G'3n- bUN& _r
Founded 1849 9 The oldest institution in the state
Mr. Robert Waibel 2 November 6, 1978
I have enclosed for your reference a list of archaeologists who have
indicated an interest in performing such a survey. If an archaeological
survey of the above project is necessary, the archaeologist hired will
need a map of the project area and an explanation of the kind of develop-
ment proposed. In addition, a copy of the survey results should be sub-
mitted to this office for final review before work on the project begins.
Thank you for your interest in preserving Minnesota's cultural resources.
Sincerely;?
Ru sell W. Fridley
State Historic Preservation Officer
RWF/cjb
Enclosure
Alan Brew
Department of An�nropology
Bemidji State College
Bemidji, Minnesota 56601
(218) 755-3938
Christy A. H. Caine
Department of Soc./Anth.
Hamline University
Zt. Paul, Minnesota 55104
(612) 641-2253
Guy Gibbon
Department of Anthropology
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 376-3256
Christina Harrison
410 Winona Street
Northfield, Minnesota 55057
(507) 645-4246
Vernon Helmen
Professor of Anthropology
Normandale Community College
9700 France Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431
(612) 935-1357 or
(612) 831-5001 ext. 245
Janet S .tor
Department of Anthropology
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 376-7148
Jan Streiff
Box 38B
Markville, Minnesota 55048
Richard Strachan
Department of Sociology.
Mankato State College
Mankato, Minnesota 56001
Alan Woolworth
3719 Sun Terrace
White Bear Lake, Mn 55110
(612) 429-4091
Kathleen Roetzal
Department of Sociology
Mankato State University
Mankato, Minnesota -
(507) 388-4543 or 389-1723
Jerry W. Oothoudt
Terra Archaeological Services
4520 - 44th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Mn. 55406
(612) 729-4211
Archaeological Field Services, Inc.
421 South Main Street - Suite 421E Clifford Watson
Stillwater, Mn. 55082 562 Holly,, Apt. 202
(612) 439-6782 or 227-2737 work 6 Paul, Minnesota 55102
(
(612) 436-7444 home (612) 226-7660
Dr. Elden Johnson
Department of Anthropology
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 376-7621
Richard Lane
Department of Anthropology
St. Cloud State College
St. Cloud, Minnesota 56301
(612) 255-2016
or
P.O. Box 687
St. Joseph, Mn. 56374
(612) 363-8411
Office 255-3010
Dr. James Fitting
Commonwealth Associates
209 E. Washington Street
Jackson, Michigan 49201
Mike Michlovic
Department of Anthropology
Moorhead State
Moorhead, Minnesota 56560
(218) 236-2632
James P. Gallagher, Archaeologist
Department of Sociology & Archaeology
University of Wisconsin - La Crosse
La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601
(608) 784-8042 home
(608) 785-8457 work
785-8463 work
Minnesota
Environmental Quality Board
100 Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Phone 296-8253
:_ --
November 1, 1978
Bloomberg Companies Incorporated
West 78th Street
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Robert Waibel
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: South Lotus Lake Addition
Gentlemen:
A petition challenging the conclusions of the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on the above project was received
in the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) offices on October 31,
1978. A copy of the petitions cover letter is enclosed.
I will be contacting you within the next few days to discuss
this matter further.
Sincerely,
Sharon Decker
Environmental Planner
SD/dh �'�v
Enc. �@' �'O'r 1973 -E5
40 REcelveo
'MLAGE OF N
C11�'N.ASSENI =u
MINK. A�,
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Environmental Quality Board
101 Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Ili 55101
NEGATIVE DECLARATION CHALLENGE -PETITION FOR A STATE EIS
The undersigned hereby authorizes John Melby, 7540 Chanhassen rd.,
Excelsior, NCI 55331, ph. 474-1949, John Segner, 7530 Chanhassen
Rd., Excelsior, ?!N 553310 ph. 474-8719, ides Arseth, 7520
Chanhassen Rd., Excelsior, NN 55331, ph. 474-4875 to be their
representatives during ECB involvement.
We the representatives and. signers of the attached petition
request an EIS of the South Lotus Lake Addition, a development
of 22 single family homes, 28 townhouses, 12 unit apartment
building, and a 60 unit Hotel on 23 acres on Lotus Lake in
Chanhassen. This development is proposed by Bloomberg Companies
Incorporated.
As a group, we are concerned about the preservation of Lotus Lake,
its fish, its wildlife, its aesthetics and recreational -versatility
which is endangered by over development and over population. This,
as with all the state lakes, is of more than local significance.
We feel this development along with all the other new developments
in the area will overload state highways 101 and 5, already at
capacity.
The additional impervious surface area created by the development
will cause:
1. Neighborhood flooding already a problem as a result of
the recent sewer and water project and create Lake Shore erosion
from high velocity rain run off.
2. Lake pollution from additional street salt and lawn
fertilizers.
'de feel the proposed development of appartments, townhouses and
a hotel, in an area not zoned for this type of construction, is
inconsistent with the surrounding neighborhoods and will have no
positive impact on Lotus Lake. We think the development will
have a negative impact because too many people will be concentrated
on a relatively small plot of land.
cc: Bloomberg Companies Incorporated 10/31/78
City of Chanhassen 10/31/78
LP
City of Chanhassen
Attached is a copy of the petition we have submitted to the
Minnesota State Engironmental Quality Board on 10/31/78.
• , A
Environmental 'Quality Board
101 Capitol Square Building
F50 Cedar Street
St. Paul, NET 55101
NEGATIVE DECLARATION CHALLENGE -PETITION FOR A STATE EIS
The undersigned hereby authorizes John Melby, 7540 Chanhassen rd.,
Excelsior, Nei 55331, ph. 474-1949; John Segner, 7530 Chanhassen
Rd., Excelsior, "i 55331, ph. 474-8719; ides Arseth, 7520
Chanhassen Rd., Excelsior, MN 55331, ph. 474-4875 to be their
representatives during EQ,B involvement.
We the representatives and signers of the attached petition
request an EIS of the South Lotus Lake Addition, a development
of 22 single family homes, 28 townhouses, 12 unit apartment
building, and a 60 unit Hotel on 2; acres on Lotus Lake in
Chanhassen. This development is proposed by Bloomberg Companies
Incorporated.
As a group, we are concerned about the preservation of Lotus Lake,
its fish, its wildlife, its aesthetics and recreational versatility
which is endangered by over development and over population. This,
as with all the state lakes, is of more than local significance.
We feel this development along with all the other new developments
in the area will overload state highways 101 and 5, already at
capacity.
The additional impervious surface area
will causes
1. Neighborhood flooding already
the recent sewer and water project and
from high velocity rain -run off.
2. Lake pollution from additional
f ertilizers.
created by the development
a problem as a result of
create Lake Shore erosion
street salt and lawn
We feel the proposed development of appartments, townhouses and
a hotel, in an area not zoned for this type of construction, is
inconsistent with the surrounding neighborhoods and will have no
positive impact on Lotus Lake. We think the development will
have a negative impact because too many people will be concentrated
on a relatively small plot of land.
cc; Bloomberg Companies Incorporated 10/31/78
��I1T2 City of Chanhassen 10/31/78
OCT 1978�
RECE1VED co
VILLAGE OF `
CHA1VIaI SEN,
MINN. ��,
i
minnesota department of health
0 717 s.e. delaware A minneapolis 55440
(612) 296-5221
October 25, 1978
Bloomberg Companies, Inc.
West 78th Street
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Gentlemen:
Enclosed is a: copy of our report covering an examination of the
Environmental, A 9essment Workshoet-Negative Deela.ration determin-
ing, within the area of the Department of Health's responsibility,
the need to require an Environmental Impact Statement for South
Lotus Lake Addition, Carver County.
We do not intend to file objections to the Negative Declaration at
this time. If you have any questions in reward to the information
contained in this report, please write us.
Yours very truly,
David G. Gray, Chief
Section of Health Risk Assessment
Enclosure
cc: Environmental Quality Board
City of Chanhassen V
"ACT ; 978 r
RECEIVED
,V.ILLc.GE or Ate:
` CHANWASSeN,
>} MINN.
an equal opportunity employer _3
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Division of Environmental Health
Report on Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) -
Negative Declarations
Project name South Lotus Lake Addition,, Carver County
Project proposer(s) Bloomberg Companion, Xna
Address bleat 78th Street, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55 1T
Responsible Agency or Person City of Chanhassen
Address 7610 Laredo Drives, Chanhassen, Minnesota 5531T
Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact Robert Walbel
Date of Negative Declaration
Notice in EQB Monitor 10/2/78
Date received 9/22/78
Deadline for filing
objection 1170
Date reviewed 10/24/7
Reviewed and submitted by Laura A. Oatman
Enviaronz*ntal Engtn*or
Scope - The examination of this EAW is limited to an evaluation of this
project within the area of the Department of Health's responsibility to
determine only the need to require an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) pursuant to 6 MCAR 93.025 and does not cover any other rules nor
limit later permit requirements and does not limit statutory authority
vested in the Department of Health.
Conclusion - The Department of Health finds the action, as described in
this EAW, to be in accord with the Negative Declaration Notice filed by
the Responsible Agency or Responsible Person and does not intend to
file objections at this time pursuant to 6 MCAR §3.028 Be1.
Comments -
Laura. A. +Oatn n
Environmental. Lnginesesr
Approved:
David G. Gray, Chief
Section of Health Risk Assessment
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 1479CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
/' (612) 474-8885
(Q
l
October 19, 1978
Mr. Herbert Bloomberg
Bloomberg Companies, Inc.
Chanhassen, Ili 55317
Ref: Lotus Lake Addition
Dear Herb:
Enclosed with this letter are copies of two correspondences received by the City
of Chanhassen from Sharon Gagnon, and Tcm Lutgen of the Minnesota Department of
I\Tatural Resources. It would be appropriate, both at the request of the Departnent
of Natural Resources and the Chanhassen Planning Commission, to have these materials
available, and in the case of the letter from Mrs. Gagnon, to have appropriate
discussion concerning her comments.
If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
rh/
Bob Waibel
Assistant City Planner
BW:k
Enclosures
N1%
t
STATE
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Metro Region Waters, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55106
Mr. Bob Waibel October 16, 1978
Assistant City Planner
7610 Laredo Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
RE: Proposed PUD on Lotus Lake - Bloomberg Companies Incorporated
Dear Mr. Waibel:
On September 12, 1978, Steve Prestin and I met with yourself and Mr. Bloomberg
to discuss the proposed Planned Unit Developmnet (PUD) on Lotus Lake. The
result of our discussion was that additional information must be submitted to
this office prior to this Department issuing a formal statement on the preliminary
plan. The additional information I requested is still outstanding and is
summarized below.
1) A detailed drainage plan showing which portion of the PUD drains into
Lotus Lake and which portion drains away from the lake. A statement out-
lining any proposed stormwater ponding/treatment structures and, if
proposed, the general design and capacities of same.
2) Information on building height and impervious surface, as follows:
a) Building height(s) for each type of structure proposed (single
family, zero lot line townhouses, apartments, and hotel) and specif-
ically which structure(s) will exceed 35' in height.
b) Percentage of the total parcel which will be covered by impervious
surfaces (roads, sidewalks, above ground parking, structures, etc).
This figure should be broken down by percentage of impervious surface
for the drainage area tributary to Lotus Lake and the drainage area
draining away from the lake.
c) The type of parking facilities proposed for Outlots A-C (above
ground versus underground). If above ground parking is proposed,
a revised preliminary plan must be submitted showing the location and
configuration of the parking area.
3) Recreational Plan for Outlot C:
a) The intended use of the area including the type of boat access to
be provided. If a boat ramp or permanent dock is proposed, outline the
dimensions and type of construction.
OCT 1978 b) Describe all other proposed facilities (boat storage, restrooms,
REVZ
road access, etc.)
V
C H
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES • WATERS, SOILS, AND MINERALS LANDS AND FORESTRY
GAME AND FISH PARKS AND RECREATION ENFORCEMENT AND FIELD SERVICE
Bob Waibel
Oct. 16, 1978
page - 2
4) Clearly define any areas of common ownership of open space and the
maintenance responsibility for the common open space. Submit a plan
consisting of a "Physical" component (situation of common land, recreational
facilities, etc.) and a "Paper" component (deed restrictions, property
owners association rules and regulations, land maintenance and management
plan, etc.)
We also suggested to Mr. Bloomberg that a copy of the proposed PUD be submitted
to Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District for their review and comment.
As required by City of Chanhassen Ordinance No. 65, the city can not approve
the preliminary plan of the proposed PUD until such preliminary plan is approved
by the Commissioner of Natural Resources (See Minn. Reg. NR83(e)(4)(aa)). This
office will not formally respond to this proposal until all requested information
is received.
If I can be of assistance, please do not hesitate to write this office or call
296-7523.
Sincerely,
Tom Lutgen
Land Use Hydrologist
TPL;sb
CC: Land Use Management Section,
Division of Waters
Al Wald,
Environmental Review
SHAKOPEE QUADRANGLE
S 0 Bi r; C T MINNESOTA
SITE 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) 5Ao9
SE/4 LAKE MINNETONKA 15'QUADRANGLE
'-,A 'ZA TA 7 MI. 456 457 3213011 2 120 000 FEET R. 23 W3 XI/. TO MINN. 7
R. 22 W. 1460 93'301
44'52'3011
J7,
932
za,
2e 00
7 �7 C, �7 C,
�7 C,
JCDO
J.'
0 968
-asse4
_- -) - J I ,�171j Milt
0
081) 000
oil FE ET
26
937--
pAGIF ✓cs I Ut -k
'J
a
log
0
j
LakeiSus-an i
876 Q
ens
7-
j
0 066
e"I
0
Z-
..... .....
if
> Zo
4965
X11.1
30 0
( a
/La Ce
r
464
"j
5(Y
35
j�
L
619
I &)
-4964
?
ZU ,11 '1�1"
.9
c.
30
915
0
14
5�ica. ..r a� Q/ � � � eLl�t� �B�✓�ir�G��z!?�L�z�-C-.�`'-��(' � 6��=� ���`i.t��G
V
Metropolitan Council
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
South Lotus Lake Addition
to the city of
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Regarding Section III - Assessment of Potential Environmental Impact, Sub-
section A. Soils and Topography, Item 3 of your Environmental Assessment
Worksheet -- I would suggest that an erosion -sediment control
Plan be made
for the steep slopes overlooking the south shore of Lotus Lake. This 'would
include lots 1 through 10 and the two cul de sacs and connecting road adja cent to them, and the two existing natural drainageways (gullies) flowing
over and down the steep slope to the lake.
Donald C. Berg i trict Conservationist
Carver Soil & �1 er Conservation District
t 16
OCT 1978
VQ
viLL,gc�g � ;�,� 1W, �7
- MN11�
HIOROPOLINn
WAfTE
(onTROL
Twin Cities Rrea
350 METRO /OUARE BLDG.
7TH 6 ROBERTITREET/
/AinT PAUL Mri 55101
612 222.8A23
y�.
October 11, 1978
Mr. John Boland, Chairman
Metropolitan Council
300 Metro Square Building
St. Paul, MN 55101
Re: Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 6380
Dear Mr. Boland:
City Administratbp
The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has reviewed the Environ-
mental Assessment Worksheet for the South Lotus Lake Addition in the
City of Chanhassen. The proposed development is within the Metropolitan
Urban Service Area delineated by the Metropolitan Council and has
available sanitary service. The Commission has no objections to the
project, but it is necessary for the. City to incorporate the flow
projections into their Comprehensive Sewer Plan.
We thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EAW.
Very truly yo;'�,_
G
Richard J. ougher
Chief Administrator
RJD:RJP:hw
cox: City of Chanhassen
OCT 1978
RECE VED
VUygpE ag
CHANHAg.tTM,
MINiw ^
n
/%"
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ST. PAUL DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1135 U. S. POST OFFICE & CUSTOM HOUSE
ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 33101
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF:
NCSCO-GR {CC346-15} b October 1975
BlooW>a rg Companies, Inc.
West 78th Street
Quah ammo i► imasota 55317
Dewar Sir!
Re: Planned Unit Developwmt
Sec. 12 * T. 116 K- * R. 23 W.
Carver Ca tyo Wmaosota
We have reviewed the information provided us concerning the referenced
project. The work you propose at the location stated is not within the
jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers.
A Department of the Army permit is not required to do this work. The
reason for this determination is given at the bottom of this letter.
This letter is valid only for the project referenced above. Therefore,
if any change in design, location, or purpose is contemplated, contact
this office at 612-725-7558 to avoid accomplishment of work which may be
in violation of Federal law.
If you have any questions, please call HS, TOM VaaDeXPOI at 612--725-7558.
Sincerely,
WILLIAM D. PARSONS
Chief, General Regulatory Branch
Construction -Operations Division
Reason for determination: The Army Corps Of Engineers has no 3urie ae-
tion, aver the project because the pLws do not includes the introduction
Of a17,y CLU or dra4od material below the o rdi"ry high watarmrk of
Lotus Lake or adJacent wetlands, :� q
CF1
It* Robert Waibel s City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drives ve s Cia ahasomm., Mbi 55317
A
Oct
k
W
Minnesota
Environmental Quality Board
100 Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Phone 296-8255
September 26, 1978
Robert Waibel, City Planner
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: South Lotus Lake Addition
Dear Mr. Waibel:
This letter acknowledges receipt of the environmental assessment
worksheet (EAW) on the above project. Notice of the EAW's con-
clusions that no environmental impact statement (EIS) is needed
will be published in the EQB Monitor on October 2, 1978.
Publication in the EQB Monitor commences the 30 day review
period for the decision. You will be notified if any challenges
to the decision are filed and EQB action is necessary. You will
also be notified if no objections are filed during the review period.
Please note that no final actions to approve or commence the project
should be taken until 30 days after publication of a Negative Declara-
tion (a decision that no EIS is needed) or, if an EIS Completion
Notice (a decision that an EIS is needed) is published, until after
the EIS is completed. This is in accord with the Minnesota Environ-
mental Policy Act (MEPA) (Minn. Stat. § 116D) and the Minnesota
Environmental Review Program Rules (6 MCAR § 3.031).
Sincerely,
Nancy S`dlustro
Environmental Planner
/dh
cc: Mrs. Carol Melby
John Boland, Chairman, Metropolitan Council
Bloomberg Companies, Incorporated
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
O
September 22, 1978
Sharon & Tim Gagnon
7508 Erie Ave.
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
Re.- Assesstment
Gentlemen:
I talked to Jerry from the Building Dept. of Chanhassen
today in regard to our recent assessment against our property -at
1508 Erie Ave.
My husband and I measured our property (from the end of our
fence since we were told that the fence is inside our property
line) to the other end. This measurement does not come up to
130' unless our fence is on our neighbor's propeit3:7Jerry
mentioned that we were to pay for the curve in the cul d sac.
However, this would be very slight if we measure from our
property line, after the land was donated to the City -
which is of course not the street edw because we donated 30'
and the present street is only 17' 10 . I presume Bloomberg
donated 30' for a total of 60' leaving a balance on each side
of the street being at least 15'.
Since we feel the amount is not 'correct,, we hope your staff
wi11 correct the matter or advise our accordingly.
X also feel that when the City Council and Planning Council
complete their study of the Bloomberg -Davis project they
consider our homes facia Erie Ave. According to Bloomberg's
initial plans, he intends to build his homes facing a cul d sac
within his own project leaving our homes to look into the
back arks of the new homes. Things such as storage sheds,
y c z ens equipment, clotheslines and other junk usually find
there way to a back -yard. Since our homes have already been
built, a project beginning should coincide with the neighborhood.
Hopefully our Planning Commission and City Council will work
out something to protect us in this mati�Wr.
Thanking you in advance,
Sharon Gagnon
••1
*� NESO,,
a
OF T4P�
Minnesota
Department of Transportation
District Five
5801 Duluth Street
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422
(612) 545-3761
September 22, 1978
Mr. Robert Wybol
City Planner
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Re: S.P. 1010 (T.H. 101)
Robert Davis & Herb Bloomberg Plats
Proposed Entrances
Dear Mr. Wybol:
As per your request, we have reviewed proposed geometrics for the
above referenced entrance. Attached is a print of what we feel
would be good geometrics for this entrance. The developer will still
be required to file an entrance permit at our District Office before
constructing the entrance.
You also suggested that the speed limit be reduced in this area. This
section was reviewed in 1973 by the District Traffic Engineer to de-
termine what the speed zone should be set at. After a speed check with
a radar unit we found that the 85th percentile speed ran about 45 M.P.H.
Normally a speed zone would be determined by this type of study.
Because the sharp curve just north of the proposed entrance requires an
advisory speed zone of 40 M.P.H., the speed zone thru this area was set
at 40 M.P.H. Just north of the sharp curve the speed limit is 50 M.P.H.
We don't feel we could accomplish anything at this time by reducing the
speed limit. If you would like to discuss this further please feel free
to contact our District Traffic Engineer, Mr. R. M. Robinson, at
545-3761 ext. 144.
If you have any other questions in regard to the above comments please
feel free to call me. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
J�
J. S. Katz, E.
Layout, Researc,
Development Engineer
25,
P
SEP 1978
RECEIVED
,VILLgG$ Qg �}
,CNAN1.�as$ZN, � i
1, M/NN. cn,
An Equal Opportunity Employer
r�L
O0
PLAT REVIEW
S. P 2736
SCALE 1"= 100'
MN/DGT -GRH
9-15-78
September 22, 1978
Sharon & Tim Gagnon
7588 Brie Ave.
Chanhassen,_Mn . 55317
also feel that when the City Council and Planning Counc:L
complete their study of the Bloomberg -Davis project they �
consider our homes facing Erie Ave. According to Bloomberg s
initial plans, he intends to build his homes facing a cul d sac
within his own project leaving our homes to Zook into the -
back ards'of the new homes. Things such as storage sheds,
c i drens equipment, clotheslines and other junk usually find
there way to a backyard. Since our homes have already been
built, a project. beginning should coincide with the neighborhood.
nopefuliy our Planning Commission and City Council -will work
out something to protect us in this matZar.
Thanking you in advance,
Sharon Gagnon
': t
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P 0 BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINN ESOTA 55317
(612 ) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: September 8, 1978
TO: Planning Commission, Staff, Robert J. Davis, 4212 Alden Dr.,
Edina, Mn. and Herbert N. Bloomberg, Bloomberg Companies, Inc.,
Chanhassen, Mn.
FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Preliminary Development Plan Review of Lotus Lake Addition,
Continuation of Public Hearing, Discussion Portion
APPLICANT: Robert J. Davis and Herbert N. Bloomberg
PLANNING CASE: P-566
"Pr-i-i i-i nr,
The Planning Commission at this time is to proceed with the discussion
portion of the public hearing process in regards to the subject
proposal.
Planner's Comments
1. At its last meeting, the Planning Commission moved to leave the
public record for written comments open for one week and to continue
with this discussion this evening. Since that time, the following
attached items have been received by this office which are as follows,
the environmental assessment worksheet as filled out by applicant,
quantification report from Mn. Dept. of Transpor-tion, and grading and
utility plans for the proposed site. Because of the recent receipt
of the grading plans and utility plans, no comment on said plans are
included in this report.
2. Also attached with this report are the public comments and petitions
received from local residents. Copies of these comments and petitions
have been forwarded to the applicant and it is anticipated that in
addition to staff response the applicant also will respond to the questionE
addressed within these documents. The following is a staff summarization,
analyzation, and response to said documents.
Petition dated August 25th, 1978, declaration of opposition to entrances
connecting to West 77th Street and Erie Avenue - petition Cover letter,
date August 31, 1978, from Clark D. Dorn and Curtis G. Robinson - letter
dated August 29-, 1978 to Planning Commis-sion and City Council from Curtis
PLANNING REPORT -2 September 8, 1978
G. Robinson.
These three documents, have expressed opposition and reasons for
opposition against the development's proposal to connect onto West
77th Street and Erie Avenue. I have recently been told by the
developer that elimination of these connections were tentatively
acceptable to his development plans which would then make the sole
entrance be one directly across from the western egress of the Chanhassen
Meadows apartments. For purposes of sound physical planning principles,
this: proposal has been submitted to the Mn. Dept. of Transportation for
further quantification. A report will hopefully be available a
Mn DOT to be presented at this meeting.
Letter dated August 1978 to Planning Commission from Wes and Delores
Arseth., 7520 Chanhassen Rd., Excelsior, 55331.
I.ncluded in this letter is a List of four reasons why certain portions
of the Bloomberg -Davis- proposal are unacceptable to Mr. and Mrs. Arseth.
The first question is why the development is not totally comprised of
only homes, rather than apartments, hotel, or community beach.
As has been stated in previous Planning Commission minutes, and also
found in common planning practices, residential development is often
buffered with various uses such as apartments, hotels or open space.
A rather sizable apartment facility exists in the Chanhassen Meadows
apartment complex and also a significantly well traveled road exists
on MTH 101. It is reasonable to expect that any developer/property
owner, would propose exactly what we see in these plans. At best
the questions of hotel vs apartments can be answered only subjectively.
In my own experience, I have seen hotels of substantial quality
function compatibly with residential areas. This is usually accomplished
with.various site planning practices. As far as the beach lot is
concerned, it is considered a type of land use that the City of
Chanhassen encourages upon the negotiation of a conditional use permit.
The second concern of the Arseths was the status of surface waters
usage of Lotus Lake. As defined by state law, Lotus Lake is open to
the public yet certain powers determining the usage of public waters
lie within the jurisdiction of county and municipal governments. To
this office it seems that the only equitable approach to resolving
the surface water traffic problem existent or anticipated on Lotus Lake
is to establish comprehensive water usage ordinances based on sound
maritime rules. Whatever limitations are placed on this development
as, to its access privileges to the water, it should be with great care
that these privileges are granted equitably.
The third concern expressed in this letter was the present speed limit
on MTH 10.1 as it fronts the subject property. This concern has'been
forwarded to the regional office of Mn DOT for quantification. We
hope that an answer will be available for this meeting.
The final concern expressed in this letter is about the beach lot.
The particular location of the beach lot, should be discussed by the
Planning Commission at this time. It is important that the establishment
of any beach.lot within the City of Chanhassen be considered as
PLANNING REPORT -3- .eptember 8, 1978
previously mentioned a privilege and be run in a fashion that will
be considered an atribute to the community.
Letter received August 30, 1978 to Chanhassen Planning Commission from
Nellie Segner, John Segner, Dan Segner, Delores Arseth, Wesley Arseth,
Jean Raymond, J. Raymond, John Melby, Carolyn Melby and Jane Horr.
Immediately following roman numeral IV of this correspondence, is
stated that "probably the most effective way to answer these questions
would be by local paper or flyer". It is hoped that this method of
correspondence through planning report would be equally effective.
The following is an attempt to answer the first four questions in
summation.
Through.the enabling legislation of the legislature of the State of
Minnesota, Chapter 462, Subchapter .351 through .364 permit municipalities
to carry out various planning activities. The preamble of the
municipal planning state enabling legislation reads as follows:
"The legislature finds that municipalities are faced with mounting
problems in providing means of guiding future development of land
so as to insure a safer, more pleasant and more economical environment
for residential, commercial, industrial and public activities and to
promote the public health, safety, morals and general welfare.
Municipalities can prepare for anticipated changes and by such preparation
bring about significant savings in both private and public expenditures. .'
The Planning Commission of Chanhassen is an appointed: commission and
is an advisory capacity to the City Council. The commissioners are
chosen by the City Council upon recommendation through application
and interview by the Planning Commission and represent the City at
large.
On page 2 are the concerns listed by the group and this office addresses
them as follows:
1. Commercial zoning in a residential area.
This proposal does not have a commerical zone as per se. During the
1960's the concept of planned development districts had been proven to
be successful whereby flexibility is entered into once ridged zoning
laws wherein the overall objective was to reward good planning and
design in addition to introduction of flexibility. As previously
mentioned in this report, only a subjective opinion at best can be
achieved in discerning the difference in degrees of overall compatibility
of a hotel vs an apartment use. The granting of a P-3 zoning for this
parcel would be subject to condition, it would not be permissive to any
other use other than a hotel or an apartment. Any changes in that
proposed use would require a plan amendment and subsequently another
public hearing process.
2. Proper use of lake shore and Lotus Lake itself.
This has been previously addressed in this report.
PLANNING REPORT -5- September 8, 1978
planned residential development district as follows. "The village
being confronted with increasing urbanization and acknowledging that
technology of land development and demand for housing are undergoing
substantial and rapid changes intends: 1) to provide the means for
greater creativity and flexibility in environmental design and is
provided under the strict application of the zoning and subcl.ivision
ordinances without compromising the health, safety, order, convenience
and general welfare of the village and its residents, 2) to encourage
the more efficient allocation and innovative use of common open space
adjoining residential building in order that greater opportunities for
better housing and recreation may be extended to the residents of the
village, 3) to provide for the establishment of regulations and procedures
for planned residential district development designed to meet the needs
for moderate and low cost housing, including uti.li.zation of pre-constructe
and pre -assembled dwelling units of a permanent nature without
sacrificing quality constructionand assembly standards and tax base,
and 4) to provide administrative procedures which can relate a planned
development district to a particular site in which may encourage the
disposition of planned development district proposals without undue
delay.
On page 3 of the document currently being discussed, there is the
suggestion of the 2.5 acre residential lots on Lake Baveria in
Chaska. It is the belief of this office that land restrictions such
as this would place many of the presently occupied properties on Lotus
Lake in a non -conforming classification, would be arbitrary and
capricious in application to this subject proposal, would be of little
benefit since there is sewer in the area and that adequate recreation
management practices for Lotus Lake could mitigate any foreseeable
problems, and that such lot size requirement would prove to be
exclusionary in practice. Upon consultation with the public works
department of Chaska it has been indicated to me that Lake Baveria
does not have sewer which is a reason, why any 2.5 acre residential
lot requirement would be imposed.
Comment number 3 on page 3 assumes that the housing will be low cost
and transient, when in fact the developer has indicated that these
will be of considerable value. Certain persons have a right to the
choice of housing style which require little or no maintenance of the
yard because of its smallness in size and that efficient use of land
through land use practices helps in the aggregate in freeing up other
lands in the region for reasonable cost housing packages.
3. An environmental assessment worksheet as required by Minnesota
State Law has been received from the applicant and has subsequently
been forwarded to the Environmental Quality Council Chairman for
publication in the EQC Monitor.
4. It is hoped that further information will be available for the
Planning Commission coming from a meeting with Tom.Lutkin and Steve
Preston of the Division of Waters, Department of Natural Resources
which is to be held on September 12, 1978.
PLANNING REPORT -4- ,ptember 8, 1978
3. The quality of the proposed development and its impact on adjoining
property values.
It has been realized through this planning exercise that development
because of public improvements already in place on the subject property,
is inevitable. It is well within the realm of possibilities that this
development would have an upward impact on surrounding property values.
4. The increased traffic on State Highway 101
This has been somewhat addressed in the last statement that the
development of this property is inevitable and that the traffic
increase is likewise inevitable as long as the random route individual
passenger vehicle is a Main stay of the local and regional transportation
system.
5. The drainage problem brought on by more impervious surface area.
As stated previous by our City Engineer, all drainage plans will have
to meet DNR and Riley Purgatory Watershed District's standards and
regulations for residential developments. These requirements are
designed so as to achieve water holding capacity and time equal to
that before development.
6. The assurance that no existing resident will be unfairly prejudiced
as a result of the development.
It is unclear what this question implies but it appears to be in the
realm of the judiciary.
7. Hotel, apartment and townhouse residents are usually transient
therefore we think that the community as a whole will not be able to
police its access and recreation areas in the manner of the Sunrise
Hills, nor will they show the concern for the Lake or the land that
has contributed so much to the success that the residents of Sunrise
Hills have had as a lake community.
It has been indicated to me by the developer that the hotel will be
excluded from the use of the beach lot. There is no substantial
evidence that townhouse dwellers would be having a high degree of
transiency. Additionally more and more greater percentage of apartment
dwellers are considered responsible types in the fact that the current
housing market has necessitated more and more of the population to use
apartment facilities including elderly and young -family residents. The
conditional use permit necessary for beach lot, will stipulate responsible
organization or persons for the proper maintenance and management of this
lot. Said conditional use is subject to annual review by the City Council.
8. How does the Bloomberg Davis plan fit with the context of the overall
plan for the development of the City of Chanhassen?
The comprehensive plan of the City of Chanhassen was adopted in 1968.
As you well know great changes have occurred in planning technics and
residential market situations. By definition, planning is an ongoing
activity meaning that from time to time the comprehensive plans must be
amended to maintain its effectiveness in the constantly changing
economic situation. Section 14 of City Ordinance no. 47 defines
PLANNING REPORT -6- September 8,.1978
Planner's Recommendation
I recommend that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the
rezoning, and subdivision, planned residential development, planned
community development, preliminary development plan, amendment to
Zoning Ordinance 47 to allow hotels in a P-3 District, and amend
the comprehensive plan to allow for a P-3 zone and zero lot line
townhouses on the subject property, based on the following conditions
and anticipations:
1. That the EQC may respond to the environmental assessment worksheet
in the time allotted by law.
2. That the representatives of the Department of Natural Resources
and Riley Purgatory Creek watershed District will have review -comments
to be entered into the record after this particular Planning Commission
review.
3. That the proposed street plans and egress' onto 101 await MnDOT
response.
4. That the proposed grading, utility, and drainage plans receive
positive comments from the City Engineer and watershed district.
August 319 1978
To: The Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen
This petition represents 100% of the families re-
presented along Erie Avenue north of highway 101,
West 77th east of Erie except for one relative of
the developer, one develop r, and one resident on
vacation.
rfe feel that this petition clearly shows the soli-
darity of the most affected residential areas against
changing the traffic flow, life styles, and prop-
erty values of the people who would be adversely
affected by the indicated development',s connections
to existing residential streets.
Your favorable consideration of this petition will
be greatly appreciated by the affected residents.
Concerned Residents
Clark D. Horn vurtis G.'"Robinson
cc: Herbert Blomberg
Robert Davis
Chanhassen City Council
WE TH.:i UND 1RS IG,-TED, H ; �,EIN OUR O 20 S IT IuN TO TH
2R02OS�;D DA'TIS/BLOOMBERG DEVELOPMENT 6NTRA 'O �'S OONNz0TIXG
TO THE �XISTIaIG USID �NTIAL STREETS. (SIGNATURy OF THIS
PETITION Du=�S NOT NH�O SSARILY LIMIT 1H 2,X2R3SS,0 OPPOSITION
TO ONLY TH3 H. RE -IN MENTIONED ISSUE.) AUGUST 25,1978
.ADDRESS
76 e8..A44,�, Q�
76 0 9 &-t� 44)C .-
d 0 pS k%-e 7 7
�o Z v A)
7 7
G d x1Lc�c.-
0�PC V/ 7 7 - tl-r
aal - 77 sT
760,Y ql�e
7&04- Z
-7 tV 0 C, �r', e 4
o ��-77,40"--
7 7
�?0 7 I/ 'V-u,
®26(p
77 �
77.)v
2-157 u- - _
AU 3 &ol 77 Ae.
2
*%Sap
-?703 � -
7 7a.3 Ar�
%1 6u-� a& ,..
�v .
7
s4�^ CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
761-G-tAREDG-DR1VErP�13-0X-1-470C14A-11KA (d (G rN-rq-ESOT7-553fi7
(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
TO: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel
FROM: City Manager, Don Ashworth
DATE: August 30, 1978
SUBJ: Attached Petition - Proposed Bloomberg/Davis Development Plan
I will assume that the attached petition will be presented to the
Planning Commission at their next meeting when this item is discussed.
Please address, in your Planning Commission memorandum, or separate
document, answers to I through IV of page 1. These can be short and
should be reviewed by Russ.
You should also note that the list of "Concerns" are determinations
that must be made by the Planning Commission and City Council after
weighing all factors. This is the purpose of holding public
meetings, inviting public comments, and after review of factors
involved and relative ordinances and laws, to make a determination
of consistency. In preparing the written findings of the Planning
Commission to the Council, the Planning Commission is in fact making
a recommendation to the Council of it's findings of consistency.
Preparation and signing of development contracts represents a contract
jointly entered into between the city and developer stating under
what terms the development is consistent. The files reflecting
developer application statements and proposals, staff reports, Planning
Commission minutes and actions, council considerations and minutes,
development contracts and permits issued - are all open to public
inspection. Items to be considered by the council are published as
well as publication of action taken by the council.
Although a majority of the issues on page 2 through 4 of the petition
are factors to be considered in light of the above comments, your
memo should address the.sections of the local ordinances which speak
to I'. and VII of page 2 and procedures followed in considering V of
page 2.
J
9
August 29, 1978
Chanhassen Planning Commission
Chanhassen City Council
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Gentlemen:
This letter is to inform you of my opposition to connecting the streets of
the proposed Bloomberg development area to the existing residential streets
(specifically West 77th Street and Erie Avenue).
My opposition is based on the following:
I. West 77th Street and Erie Avenue are currently culdesacs. The
existing proposal is to have streets connect the development area
at lower Erie Avenue and another to West 77th Street. This would
mean these two streets would connect with Highway 101. Thus our
current culdesacs would connect to a major state highway and I feel
my residential "privacy" and property value would be adversely
affected.
2. It is my understanding that previous development proposals did not
include connecting this area to existing residential streets. The
proposal in 1975, I know had no street connections and it did not
include a hotel as the existing proposal does.
3. Erie Avenue and West 77th Street have just been resurfaced and curb
and gutter installed. I was told when this project was initiated
they would be of minimum width and minimum asphalt thickness because
of the little use since both are dead ends. The streets are of min-
imum width (26 feet, I believe) and have a minimum asphalt base (2
inches). I must conclude therefore that the existing streets are not
wide enough or thick enough to handle increased traffic.
In summary, I have talked to virtually everyone in the area affected by this
development. While realizing we cannot expect this area to be farm land for-
ever we are generally not opposed to the development, but are opposed to the
street connections. Thank you for your consideration.
Curtis G. Robinson
202 West 77th Street
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
r•rcrr;: Ci'>>
Refnr&I
f,layor _
7,em.',
U-IMIL
Prey• ._._ ,_..,
4f - Data ___I/ 1 S --
fa GCA&
Gva/f A/,s. c- r y ' -7
16.
TO: Chanhassen Planning Commission
SUBJECT: Proposed Bloomberg, Davis Development Plan
Prior to the presentation of recommendations and concerns that we have
relative to the Bloomberg, Davis Development Plan we have some questions
that we would like to ask -of the Planning Commission. Answers to be
published in hopes that we will understand. These questions are as follows:
I. What is the "charter" of the Planning Commission? More precisely a
declaration or document setting forth the aims and principles of the
Planning Commission?
II. What is the "mandate" of the Planning Commission or what is the auth-
orization order or command that defines the mandate of the Planning
Commission?
III. Where does that "mandate" come from?
IV. From what "context" does the Planning Commission represent the
citizens of Chanhassen?
Probably the most effective way to answer these questions would be
by local paper or flyer.
As we understand, the Bloomberg, Davis Development plan consists of:
A. Private homes
B. Modest Houses
C. Apartments co21�0CJt�
7
D. Hotel AUe; 1978
N R cs�
E. Community access to Lotus Lake �
o CHq aE ex;� �
F. Community Recreation Areas M NAgr 4;,. 0
-2-
We, as a group, have variied concerns relative to the Bloomberg
Davis Plan and we will simply list them in a non -prioritized sequence.
"Concerns"
I. Commercial zoning in a residental area.
II. Proper use of Lake shore and Lotus Lake itself.
III. The quality of the proposed development and its impact otvadjoin-
ing property value;,
IV. The increased traffic on State Highway 101.
V. The drainage problem that is obviously going to be more servere
on lots 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the Sunset View addition with paved
roads and homes on the Bloomberg Davis development.
VI. The assurance that no existing resident will be unfairly prejudiced
as a result of the development.
VII. Hotel, Apartment and townhouse residents are usually transient,
therefore we think that the community as a whole will not be able
to police its access and recreation areas in the manner of a
"Sunrise Hills" nor will they show the concern for the lake or
the land that has contributed so much to the success that the
residents of "Sunrise Hills" have had as a lake community.
VIII. How does the Bloomberg, Davis Plan fit with the context of the
overall plan for the development of the city of Chanhassen.
"Recommendations"
I. Commercial zoning in a residential area is not appropriate and
should not take place at all.
II.. We believe that the Bloomberg, Davis Development concentrates far
too many people on a relativly small portion of land. The devel-
opment will cause a majority of Lotus Lake residents to change
0
-3-
their style of recreation and is the beginning of major restrictions
to the use of the lake. We firmly recommend that the Planning
Commission follow the example set by the Planning Commission of
Chaska and its plans relative to the development of Lake Bavaria as
Jack Melby suggested to the Planning Commission on August 23, 1978.
These are 2.5 acre residential lots to protect the quality of the
lake and land.
III. We recommend that low cost and transient housing not be developed.
Historically these types of projects decay in a relatively short
period of time and adversely effect surrounding property value.
However, we do recommend a development such as Bloomberg's resi-
dential development "Colonial Groves" where the homes and lots are
substantial.
IV. The increased traffic on State Highway 101 speaks for itself. We
don't need more traffic on Highway 101.
V. The water drainage plan of the Bloomberg, Davis proposal as of this
date does not exist. The drainage problem caused by the city
sewer and water project have yet to be corrected and the additional
water run off that will be caused by the development will have a
severe impact on the residents of the Sunset View addition. Water
run off must be a major consideration of the Planning Commission.
VI. To insure that no existing resident is unfairly prejudiced as a result
of the development, we recommend that "all" recreation facilities for
the development be centered in the development to preclude residents,
not part of the development, experiencing noise, litter, etc. from
the recreation areas.
A. Tennis courts
B. Community access
MM
We recommend that play areas for the children of the development
be planned and established in the center of the project.
VII. We recommend that if a community access is approved that it be
controlled in a manner so as not to impair fishing, water skiing
canoeing or sailing. It is possible to accomodate all water
activities on Lotus Lake if properly managed by lake residents
and the city
VIII. If the Bloomberg Davis Plan is consistant with city plans, publish it.
We want to bring to the attention of the "Planning Commission"
some of the items that are missing from the published minutes of the
Planning Commission's Public Hearing of August 23, 1978.
1. John Melby asked the question of Herb Bloomberg, "Why a hotel
there and not houses?" Herb Bloomberg responded by saying
that "Houses want to look at houses."
Comment: If that is true within a development then the
people adjacent to the development also want to look at houses,
not hotels.
2. John Segner recommended that "earth mounds be placed between
homes and Highway 101 as a buffer". Roman Roos agreed "that
would be a good idea".
3. It was stated by Roman Roos that developers have rights and
residents have rights.
�w
� J.
Minnesota State Planning Agency
101 Capitol Square Building (Environmental
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Phone 296-9031
August 25, 1978
Mrs. Carol Melby
7540 Chanhassen Road
Excelsior, MN 55331
RE: Proposed Development on Lotus Lake
Dear Mrs. Melby:
Quality Board)
AUG 1978
xi
RECEIVED
Cn
,viLLAGE OF
CHANHASSEN,
MINN.
Enclosed is the information you requested regarding petitioning
for a State Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In recent phone
conversations we've discussed your concerns about the above
referenced development.
In order to determine the scope and type of project that is proposed,
I contacted Bob Waibel from the City of Chanhassen_ According to
that conversation, the proposal includes construction of 25 single
family dwellings, a 17 unit townhouse complex, a 12 unit apartment
building and a 60 unit hotel building. Since the site is within
1000 feet of Lotus Lake, it falls under a mandatory category for
environmental review. According to Minn. Rules 6 MCAR 9 3.024 b.1.u.,
"Construction of a residential development consisting
of 50 or more residential units, any part of which is
within a shoreland area (as defined by Minn. Stat. §
105.485 (1974) "
requires preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
by the Responsible Agency, the City of Chanhassen in this case.
It is my understanding that
near future. I will be sure
and will be available at the
questions that may arise.
Sincerely,
04M �V"
Ann Hopkins, Staff
Environmental Quality Board
AH/dh
the City intends to submit an EAW in the
to notify you upon receipt of.th e EAW
above number to answer any further
cc: John Boland, Chairman, Metropolitan Council
Bob Waibel, City of Chanhassen
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
REGULAR PLANNING CQM-. SION MEETING AZJGUST 23, 1978
Rcman Roos called the Meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. with the following nhenbers present:
Mal. MacAlpine, Hud Hollenback, and Jerry Neher. Dick Matthews, Walter Thompson, and
Tim Stone were absent.
MINUTES: Approval of the July 26, -1978, Planning Commission mission minutes was tabled to
the next meting.
Hud Hollenback moved to approve the August 9, 1978, Planning Commission minutes. -
Motion seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved.
Jerry Neher moved to note the August 7, 1978, Council minutes. Motion seconded by
Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved.
Hud Hollenback moved to note the July 31, 1978, Council minutes. Motion seconded by
Mal. MacAlpine and unat mously approved.
Hud Hollenback moved to note the August 14, 1978, Council minutes. Motion seconded
by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved.
PUBLIC HEARING
DAVIS/BLOQMBERG
REZONING, SUBDIVISION, PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, PLANNED CCDZUNITY DEVEWPM-ENT
ANSI' TO ORDINANCE 447
Pzman Roos called the public hearing to order at 7:50 p.m. with the following
interested persons present:
Mr. and Mrs. W: E. Hagman, 7602 Erie
Mrs. Curtis Robinson, 202 West 77th Street
Mrs. Ejvind Fenger, 7501 Erie
Mr. and Mrs. John Melby, 7530 Chanhassen Road
Mr. and Mrs. Jeff Johnson, 7604 Erie
CZark'Horn, 7608 Erie
Don Schmi.eg, 200 West 77th Street
Vern Zetah, 7500 Erie Avenue
Bob Meuwissen, 201 West 77th Street
Mr. and Mrs. Frank Kurvers, 7220 Chanhassen Read
Paul Rojina, 220 West 77th Street
Earl McAllister, 7510 Erie
Mr. and Mrs. Wesley Arseth, 7520 Chanhassen Road
Mr. 'and Mrs. Iry Raymond, 7440 Chanhassen Road
Mr. and Mrs. John Segner, 7530 Chanhassen Road
M. Hughes, 7343 Frontier Trail
C. Peter Linsmayer, 7421 Frontier Trail
William Kirkvold, 7423 Frontier Trail
Joyce Horr, 7510 Chanhassen Road
Mr. and Mrs. Alex Hartmann, 6687 Horseshoe Curve
Mr. and Mrs. John Ryan, 6685 Horseshoe Curve
Frank Kuzma, 6651 Horseshoe Curve
Theodore Bentz, 7570 Chanhassen Road
William McRostie, 7015 Dakota
Robert Davis, 4212 Alden Drive
Sharon Gagnon, 7508 Erie
Mr. and Mrs. Richard Peters, 202 Chan View
Bill Brezi.nsky
Cra* Mertz
HerbgBl oomberg
Planning ccntmission Y rang August 23, 1978
-2-
The Assistant City Planner read the official notice as published in the Carver County
Herald.
This hearing is to consider a proposed subdivision, rezoning from R-IA to P-1 and
P-3, amendment to Ordinance 47 to allow hotels as a permitted use in a P-3 District
and preliminary development plan for the proposed develcpment on property located
on the north side of Chanhassen Road across from the Chanhassen Meadows Apartments.
The Assistant City Planner gave his report dated August 21, 1978. A copy of the
plan has been sent to the Department of Natural Resources for review. The Assistant
City Planner recamnended that the Planning Con¢ni.ssion look with favor on the proposed
rezoning, subdivision, planned residential, development, planned community development
and prelimirk-my development planand subsequently recommended an amendment of
Ordinance 47 to allow for a hotel in a P-3 District. This recammendatican is based
upon full consideration of an adequate access for .the residents on Hill Street onto
Highway 101.
Robert Davis - Mmt I am requesting is to divide 2.05 acres into four residential
lots. I have been assessed for three sewer and water units. The
access to the parcels would be from a road across the Bloomberg property.
I do have an access on Highway 101 and I am suggesting we plat this
to provide access to this street. The lots meet the minimum size
required.
Roman Roos - A long time ago, in respect to Hill Street, we had a proposal and I
can't remember the details but somehow we were going to alleviate
the traffic congestions on Hill Street Do you recall has that was?
Bob Waibel - I initially recommended that both ends of dill Street be blocked off
at both ends and have turn ar'ounds in there sufficient for snow plowing,
etc. and that the residents use the system within the Lotus Lake
Addition to give better sight distance.
Wayne Hagman - If you blocked off Hill Street and go through the Blomberg property
which I assume is going to come up later, where would this exit?
Robert Davis - I am not requesting that situation. The existing house is very
close to the line of Hill Street. If some way this was brought across
and exited out it would mean coming across down here quite a distance
to get out.
Herb Bloomberg - We are suggesting that we preserve the entire lakeshore for residential
use including another tier of lots for conventional residential lots
adjoining all of the platted area in the adjoining areas. we have
this mass here for the hotel site. This would._be-essentially an
apartment hotel of a very high quality acconngdation_ which we feel
would be a very attractive and good addition to the city. We
are in a position of course it is across from the apartments. Every
other proposal down through the years have been for apartments. I
don't that we could ever sell or prmicte a typical residential
develcFgnent except in very lot cost development. I think down
through the years there have been a number of proposals for high
density, low cost apartment development on this property which I
think is a likely trend unless we can do something of this kind
which I feel would be much more desirable. We have some lots that
would be reserved for more modest priced homes and using the concept
of zero lot line setbacks. In other words there would be two
individual hares that would have a cannon line where the house
would adjoin. The advantage of it is that it makes a better use oft -
the land and the individual, structures with.the size of two instead
of one would be a better looking structure we feel. As far as
traffic is concerned, the first consideration is topography. We
have a tremendous hill in here. ` -
Planning Ccasmission Y ting August 23, 1978 -3-
Our feeling is we want to make roads that are going to serve the
camnznity but still not invite unfavorable traffic. We have made,
we feel, good access conning down here on Chan view. 'There is good
circulation for all uses arrd still we eliminate inviting traffic
that we feel could be objectionable.
We have lived myself on Lotus Lake for 21 years and I know this
property and have lived with the thought of it for many years. I
really feel it would be desirable and attractive use of the land.
It would keep the cmplete residential tone of the area.
We want to put in an outlot for cmuunity recreational use. This
would be a private, nonprofit type of an entity similar to what is
in Sunrise Hills and I believe a system that is self policing.
It gives a emrwtn:iity park to supplement - our other park systems.
I think it would work out well for us here. All these lots would
have rights to join this association that would serve this area.
John Segner - There is no mention of any kind of. drainage on that. Am I going to
get swa Tped or what?
Herb Blomberg - We would expect to handle the storm.sewering and ponding or whatever
in conformity to the reomnVndations of the engineer.
Wes Arseth - Is there going to be any kind of a guarantee that there will not be
any more water than now go down that hill because it.is a real bear cat
right now. With. all the blacktop and everything that is coming in
it's going to multiply that by many fold.
Bill Brezinsky - I think that would be our requirement. We don't have any proposed
grades or storm. sewer systems shown at this time on the plan but
I think the city would require that theme would be no more water.
I know that the Engineering Depar a ent would require that there be
no more water draining frcm this property after the development
than there is right now.
Wes Arseth - Would there be any less?
Bill Brezinsky - We would work for less.
Wes Arseth - Is there any chance of putting in a storm sewer with the project that
would take care of that water?
Bill Brezinsky - That's a possibility. We don't have a drainage plan right now
and we don't know what the final grading of this property is going
to be. It may be possible that a good share of this could be
picked up through.a system and directed toward the lake.
Jerry Neher - Are we going to have the same problem with that thing being developed
without a holding area as they have on Lot 12?
Bill Brezinsky - There are going to be certain requirements for development put on
it by the watershed district and the DNR. I_ suspect that there
will be a holding area probably required in this outlot and since
there is quite a bit of the area that canes through this there is
going to have to be scmething done here. I don't know what form
it will take exactly.
Ronan Roos - Is there going to be a lot of land cutting in the residential portion?
Herb Bloomberg - No, we are following the basic contours very close.
Jack Melby - Why a hotel in that specific area as opposed to a downtawn area?
Herb Blomberg - We plan and expect to have hotel facilities in the downtown area.
We feel that the downtown area is a close urban development whereas
this would be an opportunity to havea green space alimentary
scheme. It would be a different tune and, we feel very desirable
and attractive.
Planning Commission . ting August 23, 1978 -4-
Jack Melby - Why are you developing for hotel reasons?
Robert Davis - The south Lotus sewer line was put several years ago and assessments
were made against that line both for existing residents and proposed i
or vacant land and there are some 50 odd assessments against this
property. Nobody is going to hold the property vacant and pay assessment
Jack Melby - I don't understand why, in a residential area, why put a hotel in, why
put townhouses in, why put apartments in?
Herb Bloomberg,- In the overall Chanhassen you have phasing areas. You have the town
development and you practically never see a urban development with
residential coming up to a wall. I feel that with the development
of the hotel surrounded by these relatively vast green spaces this
would be much more attractive .in views and for the quality of Life
in this community.
Jack Melby - I can see your point now look at Bob (Davis), he has got the adjacent
property and I understand what you guys are doing as a joint venture.
I look at Bob and I say, ok he is going to put four houses there. I
have a personal interest I own the adjacent property to Bob Davis.
Bob Davis is going to.put four homes in there, how is he going to sell
those homes with a hotel 25 feet away and tennis courts and public
access? Bob should be concerned. I am concerned because I live there.
.When I look at,the city as a whole and I look at the kinds of
development that are proposed not only for this area but for the area
downtown I see some positive things but relative to this area I see
positive things when you tell me that you are going to put private homes
up there. You tell me you are going to develop the lakeshore, that's
positive. When you tell me you are going to put hotels in a residential
area, I don't understand that. There has to be a reason why.
Roman Roos - What you are objecting to is a hotel being Iin that location, not
downtown so I understand what you are talking about.
Jack Melby - I have no objection'to a hotel in the area. The question I am asking
is why. Do I want a hotel 50 feet outside my bedroom window that's
what I am going to have. Hell,.no I don't. I understand his rights.
If I owned that property I would do something with it myself. The
question is, what the hell are you doing all this stuff for?
Herb Bloomberg.- I feel we are on a commercial highway here and so the question is
what is the best; use of this land. This hotel would serve a function
of a transient hotel, resident hotel, we have people coming that are
in between homes, retirement, someplace that's really a very fine
unusual beautiful situation and those people have as much right to
a spot. They say, maybe I don't want to buy a home.
Jack Melby - I understand that. The last planning session I sat through there was
a question relative to what we were .going to do with the property at
the intersection of_101 and 5, comments of a Happy Chef, comments of
a combination of Happy Chef and a gas station and at that time we were
saying that that area was going to be the initial area where you come
into Chanhassen, what more appropriate place than that area for a hotel
or something attractive. I have no objections to hotels. I have no
to developing of that land.
Bob Meuwissen - If there would be a hotel, how many stories 'high would you plan on
going?
Herb Bloomberg - It wouldn't be any higher than a home. Perhaps at the most three
stories. Our thinking is that we have very valuable lakeshore lots
and expect to sell those to people that want very fine homes. We
really have our own proof built in. If somebody else owned this
and I was asking for this these people obviously would ask lots of
questions. I have to answer my own questions.because I expect to
move this'first ahead of this and we expect to build and satisfy
Planning Commission V Ming August 23, 1978 -5-
these people that what we are proposing here by that time will
have plans along, models, drawings, everything finalized. We feel
that this will be a feature that will be very compatible with this.
Jack Melby - I have seen the plans and I am looking at -this as a selfish question,
as I have said before I own the adjacent property. I look at the plans
and I see some very nice things about them. I see a new community. I
see new tax base. I look at where I am at and look at Bob's property
adjacent to mine and I see this development as not a negative factor.
You talk to the people on the western side of your property and ask
them questions about how they felt about this, how they felt about that.
No one asked me. If I look at this piece of property right down in my
front yard I am going to have a community access, I am going to have a
tennis court and a hotel. That's a selfish issue. Do I like that, no.
Can I anything about it? Hell, I°don't know.
Roman Roos - What we are trying to do is get a feel of the public, their response
to this proposal and the various concepts of this proposal. To answer
your question, yes, you are heard and that's the kind of view we are
looking for so we can make a decision in the land use and the planning
of all of Chanhassen. -
Mal MacAlpine - Would you object as much to an apartment house with tennis courts
being planned as you would the hotel or is your objection primarily
the hotel?
Jack Melby - I think I would object outside my bedroom window having apartments.
I would object to tennis courts outside my bedroom window. I would
to tennis courts in my front yard because that's where we enjoy the
beach. I understand that there is a lot of people to consider here.
I am only one family. If Herb came to me and told me that he was
going to develop that for residential property, that's his property.
He can develop that as he wishes. He has the right of private enterprise.
I do too. I can take my property and put it into four lots like Bob
did. I won't because I like it the way it is.
Frank Kuzma - What additional density would you expect in regard to boat traffic
as a result of this property?
Herb Bloomberg - I really think it would be very small. I am very much expecting
that if there is any abuse of the boating privileges on Lotus Lake
we are going to see tighter and tighter restrictions. In fact I
-am satisfied that we would have no motorized boats going o ,s
area.
Frank Kuzma -:I would think with a development like this we are going to end up
having,to-completely ban motors :on the lake period.
Clark Horn - You indicated the development across from the apartments (Chanhassen
Meadows) is not usable as a residential area. Was that based on the
facts that it's next to Highway 101 or the fact that it is across the
street from the apartment houses?
Herb Bloomberg - I think it is rather unusable. I wouldn't gamble a dollar on
building a house in here and try to sell it across from those
apartments. I think people would say, that's a nice house but I
wouldn't want to live on Highway 101 and facing those apartments,
not that there is anything wrong with apartments. Our feeling here
is -that this hotel would look more like a home. Our feeling is
that this would be just a very attractive home like atmosphere
and completely landscaped.
Don Schmieg - All the previous developments that we have had come in here have had
no access to the old streets on the old part of town. It's kind of
Planning Commission M, `ing August 23, 1978
a quiet end of town and they are dead end streets and I for one
bought a house down there because it is. My property adjoins directly
with that particular piece of property by the well. I would like to
know why now we all of a sudden exited two streets onto one that
doesn't have enough room now? You are going to drain all the water
down that area. Storm sewer faci-1 i_ties -were just -put in. I know for
a fact they are not big enough to handle that plus all the extra
traffic.
Bill Brezinsky —About five -acres of this area will drain into the new system.
Wes Arseth - What would be the possibility of lowering the speed limit on 101 to say
30 which would make it a little easier for people to get or. and_off?_
Frank Kurvers - I would like to know the density in all these different areas as
far as his overall land use and his density.
Roman Roos - We are looking at 122 units totally including the 60 unit hotel.
Hud Hollenback - Sixty - hotel, twelve - apartment, and the rest single family. Some
of which would be zero lot line.
Jack Melby - I would like to go on record with a statement. (1) Houses instead of
hotels. (2) Community access in the center of the community as opposed
to adjacent to my property:"
Wayne Hagman - I would like a clarification of the rezoning proposition. You are
talking about a hotel. What happens if that hotel doesn't go in.
What else can go in there in lieu of the hotel?
Mal MacAlpine - If we would agree to this plan and recommended it to the Council
and they said all right to the rezoning, he could not put anything
else up there unless it came back to the Planning Commission and
it was reviewed all over again.
Bob Waibel - Any use other than a hotel, once approved, would have to come back
for a plan amendment.
Mal MacAlpine - I think the one thing that wasn't covered here and I just want
to be sure everyone knew the amount of property he is talking about
that would be devoted to the hotel, not because I am for the hotel
I am not in a position to say that, but it's 248,000 square feet.
The only reason I bring that up is that it would be a rather large
area. It is going to be a very large green area in here. I am saying'
you could also come up with a plan, as a developer to get the most
money out of it, where he would make it a high density area where
you might try to put in 300 apartments in that same space.
Earl McAllister - This is strictly going to be a residential hotel. There would
be no bars or liquor license?
Herb Bloomberg - I am sure not.
Frank Kurvers - Are you going to require an environmental impact statement on this
project?
Bob Waibel - An environmental worksheet must be completed by the applicant before
Council gives final approval.
Frank Kurvers -Are Mr. Davis' lots going to be able to use the outlot?
Bob Davis - I have made no arrangements to use that outlot. The reason that the
two are reviewed together is my first proposal to the Planning Commission
was access onto Highway 101 and the suggestion was I didn't use access
to 101 that I work with the adjacent property owner for all the traffic
access.
Frank Kurvers -- You didn't answer my question.
Planning Commission M ting August 23, 1978
-7-
Roman Roos - There are two separate proposals being reviewed together.
Craig Mertz - It would be two separate plats.
Bob Meuwissen - When they start developing which way are they going to bring in the
ready mix and the equipment?
Mr. Bloomberg invited residents to meet with Mr. Davis or himself to discuss the
proposal.
Jack Melby —There was a Planner's recommendation which"Teally hasn't been discussed
and that was what,to do with Hi11 Street. Since some of the residents
are here that should be reviewed.
Bob Waibel - What my recommendation essentially was that these be blocked off and
that the residents, if they so desire, gain a safer access through the
transportation system of the development.
Bob Davis - I don't want to pay for improving roads for other people. They have a
road now. If the city would recommend some public improvements this is
something else.
,,l/John Segner - There was four of us that were assessed $1,000 extra for putting tar
on Hill Street and.I don't see why anybody else should be cutting in
on it now.
Bob Davis - I am not using Hill Street and that was one of the Planner's original
comments back two meetings ago that we not put any additional traffic
on Hill Street.
Bob Waibel - My recommendation was to essentially eliminate what I thought was a
hazardous access onto 101.
Bill Brezinsky - I think we are saying that we still wish that something could be
done about the Hill Street thing but with this plan as it is
presented right now I don't think it's worth it.
Jerry Neher - It is a very dangerous place for a school bus to be turning around.
Mal MacAlpine moved to close the public hearing and hold the public record open
for one week to receive written comments. Motion seconded by Hud
Hollenback and unanimously approved. Hearing closed at 9:25 p.m.
DAVIS/BLOOMBERG SUBDIVISIONS: Mal MacAlpine moved to table discussion until
September 13, 1978. Motion seconded by Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved.
HESSE FARM, PHASES II'AND III -- PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT;PLAN: Mr. Hesse is proposing
to subdivide phases II and III of the Hesse Farm which is located on the west side
of Bluff Creek Drive into 27 residential lots averaging approximately five acres
in size. The Council moved to rescind resolution 911721 in the occasion of the
Hesse Farm at its July 17, 1978 meeting. The Planner discussed his report of
August 23, 1978. The property is rezoned P-1.
Roman Roos - Let's take the four variances and state our reasons. The first would
be the platting and subdivision of lands within the area not served
with sanitary sewer.
Mal MacAlpine - At our last meeting we felt that if we did make a recommendation tc
approve this recommendation that we should be very sure that the
City Engineer took the necessary steps to see proper type septic
system was designed.
Hud Hollenback-- I agree, I think that's the main consideration here. Apparently
it worked for the first phase.
Jerry Neher - A previous Planning Commission had more or less approved the whole
project. This was grandfathered in in my opinion.
Roman Roos - Once we made the recommendation to rescind that resolution 911721
to the Council that automatically said that we figured that Ordinance
45 would not take effect in that area but we did state that the septic
_ Planning Commission Meeting August 23, 1978 _7-
Roman Rocs - There are two separate proposals being reviewed together.
Craig Mertz - It would be two separate plats.
Bob Meuwissen - When they start developing which way are they going to bring in the
ready mix and the equipment?
Mr. Bloomberg invited residents to meet with Mr. Davis or himself to discuss the
proposal.
Jack Melby - There was aPlanner's recommendation which '.real.ly.hasn't been discussed
and that was what -to do with Hill Street. Since some of the residents
are here that should be reviewed.
Bob Waibel - What my recommendation essentially was that these be blocked off and
that the residents, if they so desire, gain a safer access through the
transportation system of the development.
Bob Davis - I don't want to pay for improving roads for other people. They have a
road now. If the city would recommend some public improvements this is
something else.
John Segner - There was four of us that were assessed $1,000 extra for putting tar
on Hill Street and I don't see why anybody else should be cutting in
on it now.
Bob Davis - I am not using Hill Street and that was one of the Planner's original
comments back two meetings ago that we not put any additional traffic
on Hill Street.
Bob Waibel - My recommendation was to essentially eliminate what I thought was a
hazardous access onto 101.
Bill-Brezinsky - I think we are saying that we still wish that something could be
done about the Hill Street thing but with this plan as it is
presented right now I don't think it's worth it.
Jerry Neher - It is a very dangerous place for a school bus to be turning around.
Mal MacAlpine moved to close the public hearing and hold the public record open
for one week to receive written comments. Motion seconded by Hud
Hollenback and unanimously approved. Hearing closed at 9:25 p.m.
DAVIS/BLOOMBERG SUBDIVISIONS: Mal MacAlpine moved to table discussion until
September 13, 1978. Motion seconded by Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved.
HESSE FARM, PHASES II AND III - PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Mr. Hesse is proposing
to subdivide phases II and III of the Hesse Farm which is located on the west side
of Bluff Creek Drive into 27 residential lots averaging approximately five acres
in size. The Council moved to rescind resolution 911721 in the occasion of the
Hesse Farm at its July 17, 1978 meeting. The Planner discussed his report of
August 23, 1978. The property is rezoned P-1.
Roman Roos - Let's take the four variances and state our reasons. The first would
be the platting and subdivision of lands within the area not served
with sanitary sewer.
Mal MacAlpine - At our last meeting we felt that if we did make a recommendation to
approve this recommendation that we should be very sure that the
City Engineer took the necessary steps to see proper type septic
system was designed.
Hud Hollenback - I agree. I think that's the main consideration here. Apparently
it worked for the first phase.
Jerry Neher - A previous Planning Commission had more or less approved the whole
project. This was grandfathered in in my opinion.
Roman Roos - Once we made the recommendation to rescind that resolution 911721
to the Council that automatically said that we figured that Ordinance
45 would not take effect in that area but we did state that the septic
�° d`�NNESOT,9
n a
T OF TRPa
August 23, 1978
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Mr. Robert Wybol
City -.Planner
City.of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
City Hall
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
District 5
2055 No. Lilac Drive
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422
In reply refer to: 315 fR
S.P. 1010 T.H. 101
Plat review of Robert Davis and Herb. Bloomberg Plats
located N. of Jct. T.H. 101 and W. 78th St. on west side
of T.H. 101 in City of Chanhassen
Carver County
Dear Mr. Wybol:
(612)545-3761
AUG 1978
RECEIVED V1�)
LI AGM of �
CWANHASSgN� '-✓
MINN.
We are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance
with.Minnesota.Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find the
plat acceptable for further development with consideration of the following
comments:
-- No problems are anticipated with the drainage if the present patterns
are maintained.
--Predicted noise -levels from the highway are expected to exceed State and
Federal standards. Alternative measures for design of the proposed
development such as building setbacks, use of local topography or
establishment of earth..berms should be investigated. The Minnesota
Department of Transportation policy is such that we will not provide any
type of noise altenuation devices along this type of facility, or where
new development takes place.
There is a manual available as a reference on this subject which was
prepared for the U.S. Department of Transportation titled, "The
Audible Landscape." Copies of this manual were distributed toall
municipalities in our District in January 1976. Copies are also available
at our District Office for review.
-- As this and other plats continue to develop adjacent to T.H. 101 it will
create a demand on the existing roadway which will require some upgrading.
Therefore, we suggest the developer provide a minimum of 27 feet of
additional right of way so as not to limit future improvements.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
T
Mr.. Robert Wybol
August 23, 1978',
Page 2
- The developer will be required to make application for an entrance permit
before any construction on the Trunk Highway right of way. Based on the
proposed development, we would require the developer to. construct
necessary turn lanes to accommodate his traffic. We anticipate this
development could generate Approxi.mately'1000-1200 vehicle trips per
day.
If you have any questions in regard to. the above comments, please contact our
District. Layout, Research and Development Engineer Mr. .J. S. Katz. at 545--3761
extension 150. Thank you for your cooperation in these matters.
Sincerely,
.
q*��
W. M. Crawford, P.E.
/ District Director
cc: John Boland
Metropolitan Council
Carl Madson
Carver County Surveyor
9 t
Minnesota State Plannin� Agency
101 Capitol Square Building Environmental
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Phone 296-9031
August 23, 1978
Bob Waibel, Planner
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: Proposed Development on Lotus Lake
Dear Mr. Waibel:
Quality Board)
According to our phone conversation today, the above referenced project
is proposed to include 25 single family dwelling units, a 17 unit town-
house complex, a 12 unit apartment building and a 60 unit hotel. It is
my understanding that the site for the project is located on the south
shore of Lotus Lake in Chanhassen.
According to Minn. Rules 6 MCAR � 3.024 B.l.u.,
"Construction of a residential development consisting of
50 or more residential units, any part of which is within
a shoreland area (as defined by Minn. Stat. § 105.485 (1974)"
requires preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). It
appears that this proposed development falls under that mandatory cate-
gory. The City of Chanhassen, as the Responsible Agency, is therefore
required to submit an EAW to the EQB for review.
As you requested, I have enclosed the EAW forms and the EQB distribu-
tion list. Please note that an affidavit of mailing must be included with
the EAW sent to the EQB Administrator.
I will contact you with any further information concerning this
project. If you have any further questions, please contact me at the
above number.
Sincerely,
Ir �
Ann Hopkins, Staff
Environmental Quality Board
n AUG 1978 u
DECNJCEIVED
CHANiiABg ,a. '�V
AH/dh
cc: Al Wald, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Waters
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
March 1, 1978
ma.• a r• i� v rP-Nn:•• •t
t 4' P •
State Planning Agency
Peter Vanderpool, Chairman (EQB)
Director, State Planning Agency
Roan 101, Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 55101 1 copy
Tan Rull.and (TC)
Manager, Environmental Mgmmt. Programs
Roan 100, Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MM 55101 1 copy
Transportation
James Harrington, Commissioner (EQB)
Department -of Transportation
Roan 411, Transportation Building
John Ireland Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155 1 copy
H)vaRsoC)
(TC )
Department of Transportation
1t,aamrSi , Transportation Building
°7 John Ireland Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155 1 copy
Pollution Control Aaencv
Sandra Gardebring, Director
MN Pollution Control Agency
1935 West County Road B2
Roseville, MN 55113
Clarence Johannes (TC)
MN Pollution Control Agency
1935 West County Road B2
Roseville, MN 55113
Agriculture
William Walker, Cmrissioner (EQB)
Department of Agriculture
Roan 420, State Office Building
St. Paul, MN 55J
155 1 copy
SA,•,/�4 �c)! u' kne-foj2
(TC)
Department of Agriculture
S L3 R—= 59A State Office Building
j?m St. Paul, MN 55155 1 copy
Health
Warren Lawson, Commissioner (EQB)
Department of Health
717 Delaware Street S.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55440 1 copy
/.AURPr Qq�{mgnl
(TC)
Department of Health
717 Delaware Street S.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55440 1 copy
Energy N=_
John Millhone, Director (EQB)
MN Energy Agency
740 American Center Building
150 East Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55101 1 copy
Karen Cole (TC)
1 copy MM Energy Agency
740 American Center Building
150 East Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55101 1 copy
2 copies
Natural Resources
William Nye, Cameaissioner (EQB)
Department of Natural Resources
Third Floor Centennial Building
658 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 55155 1 copy
Vonny Hagen (TC)
Department of Natural Resources
Third Floor Centennial Building
658 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 55155 2 copies
Environmental Quality Board Staff
Mary Sullivan, Aaninistrator
Roan 100, Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
3�.•�.,�%f.'I, St. Paul, MN 55101 1 copy
WJ B Environmental Review Program
Roan 100, Capitol Square Building
550 Cedar Street
1 St. Paul, MM 55101 6 copies
Governor's Office QB) �a �+n v I oe 0se-
State Capitol G o U �s, ���
St. Paul, MN 55155 1 copy
Historical Society
Russell W. Fri ey
Fort Snelling Branch
Fort Snelling, Building 25
St. Paul, MN 55111 1 copy
Corps of Engineers
Dave Parsons, Chief
Environmental Regulatory Division
1135 U.S. Post Office
St. Paul, MN 55101 1 copy
Environmental Conservation Library
300 Nicollet Mall
Minneapolis, MN 55401 2 copies
FOR FURTHER IWCE MATICN REGARDING THIS LIST CONTACT EQB INFORMATION (612) 296-2723
APPROXIMA MY 32 COPIES NEEDED FOR DISTRIEE ON
Regional Development mission
Regia :xi r ary
1 copy for the regict,,-/ affected
1 Copy _or�i region(s) affected
Region 1 (Northwest)
elm 11
Eugene Abbott, Executive Director
Polk County -Crookston Library
425 Woodland Avenue
120 North Ash Street
Crookston, MN 56716
Crookston, MN 56716
Region 2 (Headwaters)
Region 2
John Ostrem, Executive Director
B n dj -Public Library
Mental Health Building
Sixth and Beltrami
Bone 584
Bemidji, MN 56601
Banidji, MN 56601
Region 3
Region 3 (Arrowhead)
Du u Public Library
Rudy Esala, Executive Director
101 West Second
200 Arrowhead Place
Duluth, MN 55802
211 West Second Street
Duluth, MN 55802
Region 4
Region .4 (West Central)
Fergus Falls Public Library
125 North Union
James Myhra
Fergus Falls, MN 56537
Administration Building
Fergus Falls Canmanity College
Region 5
Fergus Falls, MN 56537
ElaTi ami Regional Library
Pine Rives, MN 56474
Region 5
Robert F. Benner, Executive Director
Region 6E
102 - 6th Street North
CrowCrow Ri Regional Library
Staples, MN 56479
Attn: Burt Sundberg
410 West Fifth
Region 6E (Six East)
Willmar, MN 56201
Eugene Hippe, Executive Director
City Auditorium
Region 6W
311 West 6th Street
C C ty Library
Willmar, MN 56201
224 South First Street
Montevideo, MN 56265
Region 6W (Upper MN Valley Regional
Development Commission
Region 7E
Dennis Dahlem, Executive Director
East Central Regional Library
323 West Schlieman
240 Third Avenue SW
Appleton, MN 56208
Cambridge, MN 55008
Region 7E (East Central)
Region 7W
Philp eD lVecchio
Great River Regional Library
Kanabec County Courthouse
124 South Fifth Avenue
18 North Vine Street
St. Cloud, MN 56301
Mora, MN 55051
Region 8
Region 7W (Central Minnesota)
Marshall -Lyon County Library
Otto Schmid, Executive Director
301 West Lyon Street
2700 - 1st Street North
Marshall, MN 56258
St. Cloud, MN 56301
Region 9
Region 8 (Southwest)
MN V eey Regional Library
Gerald Chasteen
120 South Broad Street
Box 265
Mankato, MN 56001
Slayton, MN 56172
Region 10
Region 9
Ro ester Public Library
Terence Stone, Executive Director
Broadway at First Street SE
Manpower Services Building
Rochester, MN 55901
709 North Front Street
Mankato, MN 56001
Region 10 (Southeastern Minnesota)
Rolf Middleton, Executive Director
301 Marquette Bank Building
South Broadway at 2nd Street S.E.
Rochester, MN 55901,
Region 11 (Metropolitan Council)
John Boland, Chairman
Roan 300 Metro Square Building
7th and Robert Streets
St. Paul, MN 55101
NOTE: Mail a copy to the city and county directly impacted, and to adjacent counties
or municipalities likely to be directly impacted by the proposed action.
Minnesota Development Regions
tilts" I Rite
It�r.bl1�
bllr..l
Iktwkl.rl.�
M.IgtM
bola"
w
r►Ir el..r-
rqr
Vy
I,..N
Mrr Irk..nr
M. 6w1/
MrNN
clot b.r.r
�...
Yl,kl 4
mom
5
o.r,,«
Nt.rl.l1
$EMONAY, DEVE UFM CWQIIS8ION
i...�
P1..
1
Northwest
Ty+
2
Headwater
h..e �.yl..
tl.rrl.wt
3
Arrowhead
4
West Central
lest"
5
Region Five
oil ~
~••«• rr.
��••
69
Six Bast
ri. I.s.tl
I...N 6W
Upper Minnesota valley
7E
East Central
t■In
IrtAl
�..r.
7W
Central Minnesota
Koslow
trl�t
8
Southwest
Imo"'
IMbay.wN. .
9
Region Nine
Am two MI
1 10
Southeastern Minnesota
V.11w Wool"M'
ftrw
11
Metropolitan Council
111•Babou
Sibley
Lloselm Was
ftoftd mIwlis! Lose" Ala
IkiN.r.
from
PIP•
st"10 �.rrar ant...s.d tram. It"e►nr Mssl• �. "mom Vl....
Oak ew,.s J.sYn. 111.rOk fps rissall
Irso.sr. lower Rl,ls.n. omt..
7610 LAREDO DRIVE9P.O. BOX 147eCHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
d �
August 22, 1978
Commissioner of Natural Resources
Attn: Thomas Lutgen
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
Dear Tom:
Enclosed are the preliminary development plans of a PUD on South
Lotus Lake and the accompanying planner's reports. The public
hearing is to be held on August 23, 1978, at 7:45 p.m. at the
City Hall. I have found the properties involved with the proposed plan
to be in conformance with Shoreland Management Ordinance as adopted
by reference in the City of Chanhassen. We will hold the public
record open for receipt of your comments until Friday, September 1,
1978.
If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
tom'`
Bob Waibel
Assitant City Planner
BW:K
Enclosures
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: August 21, 1978
TO: Planning Commission, Staff and Robert J. Davis,
4212 Alden Drive - Edina, Minnesota and Herbert N.
Bloomberg, Bloomberg Companies, Inc., Chanhassen, Mn.
FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Preliminary Development Plan Review of Lotus Lake Addition,
Public Hearing
APPLICANT: Robert J. Davis and Herbert N. Bloomberg
PLANNING CASE: P-566
Petition
The petition before the Planning Commission at this time is to hold
a public hearing concerning the proposed South. Lotus Lake Development
and to gather neighborhood sentiment to the subject proposal.
Planner's Comments
1. As mentioned at previous meetingson the subject proposal, the subject
property is located on Highway 101 on the south end of Lotus Lake
directly across Highway 101 from the Chanhassen Meadows Apts.
2. The preliminary development plan dated August 2, 1978 does not have
the rear yard setbacks indicated as prescribed by Ordinance 33. The
rear yard setbacks for residential districts are 30 feet with the
exception that the lots abutting Lotus Lake shall maintain 75 feet
setback from the highwater elevation. It is the opinion of this office
that due to the multi -frontage situation, Lot 10 of Block 1, the 30-ft.
setback from the access to the lift station could be reduced to a minimum
of 10 feet.
3. The plans dated August 2, 1978 indicate the tennis courts originally
proposed on Outlot C have been removed. It was hoped by this office
that those tennis courts designated to be used by the residents of the
area could be placed alongside those for the guests at the hotel complex
on Outlot B.
4. Subdivision Ordinance 33 states that the proposed name of the
addition shall not duplicate nor be alike in pronunciation to the name
of any plat recorded in the county. As you remember, the Planning
Commission just recently approved a planned unit development for Lotus
PLANNING REPORT -2- 8-21-78
Lake Estates approximately one mile north of this subject property.
Also, the applicant has not indicated any street names for the
proposed plat. The applicant should be aware that the City adopted a
policy wherein the streets in this section of town are to be named
after American Indian Tribes. Again these names are not to be
duplicate or alike in pronunciation to the name of any street
within the City.
5. All subdivisions in Chanhassen are to regard the natural features of
the land. It can be expected that between preliminary development
plan review and final plat of the proposed subdivision some changes
in the plan may have to occur in order to provide for adequate drainage,
storm water retention, and retention of vital natural vegetation.
6. The applicants have indicated to me that the planned phasing of
the proposed development is to initiate the residential portion of the
plan as soon as the public improvements are installed and that the
hotel facility is tentatively planned for construction one year after
plan approval.
7. As mentioned in the planning reports throughout the review of this
particular plan, it has been great concern to this office about the
extraordinary opportunity that this development provides for the
mitigation of the dangerous access of Hill- Street onto Highway 101.
At this time I reiterate this concern and recommend that the residents
of Hill Street be allowed to use the streets in the Lotus Lake Addition
for access onto Minnesota Trunk Highway 101.
8. The sentiments of the Park and Recreation Commission are expressed
on the attached minutes of the August 1, 1978 meeting. The Planning
Commission should take these comments under advisement and include
them in formulating their recommendation on the proposed development.
Planner's Recommendation
I recommend that the Planning Commission look with favor upon the
proposed rezoning, subdivision, planned residential development,
planned community development, and preliminary development plan of
Robert Davis and Herb Bloomberg and subsequently recommend amendment
of zoning Ordinance 47 to allow for a hotel in a P-3 District. This
recommendation is based upon the full consideration of an adequate
access for the residents on Hill Street onto Mn. Trunk Highway 101.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN
COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED
REZONING SUBDIVISION PLANNED
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, PLANNED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND AMEND-
MENT AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT
PLAN TO ZONING ORDINANCE 47 FOR ROBERT
DAVIS AND HERBERT BLOOMBERG,
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the Planning
Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, will
meet on Wednesday the 23rd day of August,1978, at 7.45
p.m. for the purpose of holding a public hearing to
consider: a) proposed subdivision and b) rezoning from
R-IA Agricultural Residence District to P-1 Planned
Residential Development and P-3 Planned Community
Development, and c) amendment to Zoning District
Ordinance
47 to allow preliminaryels as developmented plan or in a Pthe proposed
development on the following described tract of land:
DESCRIPTION OF SOUTH END OF LOTUS LAKE
All that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter (SEt/4 of SE'6'4) and Government Lot Three (3),
Section Twelve (12), Township One Hundred Sixteen
(116) North, Range Twenty Three (23) West lying nortp
of the North Line of the right-of-way of State Truntt
Highway No. 101 (said North Line being also the North
Line of the abandoned right of way of the Chicago,
Milwaukee 3 St. Paul Railroad) and West of the
following described tine, to -wit: Beginning at the in-
tersection of West Line of the Southeast Quarter of the
Southeast Quarter (SETA of SE51) of Section TwelveRange
said Township One Hundred Sixteen (116), g
Twenty Three (23) and the North Line of the right-of-
way of State Trunk Highway No. 101; thence North 50
degrees 51' East along the North right-of-way line of
said Highway No. 101 for a distance o 1314.29 feet to the
actual point of beginning of the line to be described;
thence North 22 degrees 01' 50" West to the shore of
Lotus Lake and there terminating.
Excepting therefrom the following:
1. That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter of Section 12, Township 116 North, Range 23
West, dPst'rihed as follnws-
Beginning at the Northeast corner of Block 3, St.
Hubertus Addition to Chanhassen, bein a point of the
West line .f the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter of said Section 12 a distance of $90 feet North of
the Southwest corner of said quarter quarter section;
thence Esster;q atang the Northerly line Di said Block 3
extended a distance of 150 feetg thence. Southerly and
parallel with the West line of said Southeast Quarter of
the Southeasl Quarter of Section 12 to the Northerly
right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 101;
thence Southwcster_y along sand Northerly rightof•way
line to its tnterse•,tien with the West line of said
Southeast Quarter of tn,: , rutheast Quarter of Section
12; therm^ ` ,rthtr1} 'n ixtd West line to the place of
beginning.
2. That part �f Government Lot 3 said Section 12
described as fellows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of Block 3, St.
Hubertus Addition to Chanhassen, being a point on the
West line of the Southeast quarter of the Southeast
Quarter of said Section 12, a di"rice of 699 feet North of
the Southwest corner of said quarter quarter section;
thence Northerly along the West line of the Southeast
quarter of the Southeast quarter and the West line of
Government Lot 3 said Section 12 for a distance of
1030.20 feet to the actual point of beginning of the land to
be described; thence on 9 hearing of South 89 degrees
59' 48" East for a distance of 115,00 feet; thence on a
bearing of North NO degrees o' U" East parallel with
the said West line of Government Lot 3 for a distance of
283,64 feet, more or lent :o the water's edge of Lotus
Lake; thence Northeasterly along said water's edge of
Lotus Lake to the point of intersection with the West line
of Government Lot 3; thence South along the West line
of said Government Lot 3 to the point of beginning.
SOUTH LOTUS LASE SECOND ADDITION
Beginning at a point on the Northwesterly boundary
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Paul Railway
(H.D. Div.) where the same crosses Sec. 12, Township
116, Range 23, which point is 246.6 feet in a Sally
direction from the SE corner of land deeded by Frank
Mlinar and wife to William Mason by deed dated Mar.
22 µM.� p nrNJetij(i}{� f a y f, Count{ in Book 22 of Deeds
i{ Gi,�6�� 4l YIVL lt.LUV &1t , .-2 --,, __AA
'SSOUR!
apq a Jalp X_ncl smog *IS ut teltdsOH
s.pogiaN Ie LZ AInf pa?p aH 'exSegD
o ApaulJoJ ` SIdW "OS ` OAV 10111:g
1055 `OE `sole.1ilM a5JoaH JoJ I£ AInf
A7apuolq ptag 039M sa3LiJ9s IUJOU11 q
SNVITIIM aDHOH9
-siuoulasueJJe JO 02Jega
It sf auloH jeaauna sepia-uquIluuZ
•smagdau
sue saaatu `uaJp1moopueJ2 Zi !PiaTjgl
JON Jo 151sMopueMaq (aissaZ) iy *S.IN
iwpui-JaISIS a pue uOl.2uigseM `alphas
PJOUJV (iaJe;JJeyQ) OIA'I •sJJq 'JOIS[s
3 Aq panlA.lns OSje St OH •axed Jeag 01RIM
Affidavit of Publication
Sate of Minnesota )
) ss.
County of Carver )
William McGarry being duly swornon oath says he is and during
all the time herein stated has been the publisher and printer of the newspaper known as Carver County Herald and has full
knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: (1) Said newspaper is printed in the English language in newspaper format
and in column and sheet form equivalent in printed space to at least 900 square inches. (2) Said newspaper is a weekly
and is distributed at least once a week. (3) Said news paper has 50% of its news columns devoted to news of local interest
to the community which it purports to serve and does not wholly duplicate any other publication and is not made up
entirely of patents, plate matter and advertisements. (4) Said newspaper is circulated in and near the municipality which
it purports to serve, has at least 500 copies regularly delivered to paying subscribers, has an average of at least 75% of its
total circulation currently paid or no more than three months in arrears and has entry as second-class ratter in its local
post -office. (5) Said newspaper purports to serve the City of Chaska in the County of Carver and it has its known
office of issue in the City of Chaska in said county, established and open during its regular business lours for the
gathering of news, sale of advertisements and sale of subscriptions and maintained by the managing officer of said
newspaper, persons in its employ and subject to his direction and control during all such regular business hours and at
which said newspaper is printed. (6) Said newspaper files a copy of each issue immediately with the State Historical
Society. (7) Said newspaper has complied with all the foregoing conditions for at least one year preceding the day or dates
of publication mentioned below. (8) Said newspaper has filed with the Secretary of State of Minnesota prior to January 1,
1960 and each January 1 thereafter an affidavit in the form prescribed by the Secretary of State and signed by the
managing officer of said newspaper and sworn to before a notary public stating that the newspaper is a legal newspaper.
He further states on oath that the printed Notice of Hearin
hereto attached as a part
hereof was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published therein in the English language,
once each week, for one successive weeks; that it was first so published on Wed. the i-6th
say of Aug' 19 -Land was thereafter printed and published on every -- to and
including the day of 19_ and that the following is a printed copy of the lower case alphabet
from A to Z, bath inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and
publication of said notice, to wit:
abcdefghi jkhnr ^^^^oi,,.,_.
Subscribed and sworn to before me th��Y of
(Notarial Seal)
Pull,
LORRAINE LAND
NOTARY PUBLIC r MINNESOTA
CARVER COUNT;
My Commission Expires June 29. 1982
Notary public, e6 ` —' ` County, MinneWa
My Commission Expires _ z � )-- i 19 ;I-
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE OF HEARING
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF CARVER
ss.
)
Don Ashworth , being first duly sworn, on oath deposes
and says that he is and was on August 11 r 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
Bloomberg/Davis. Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision in 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.
1 / 1
Don Ashworth, City Dlanager
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this day of - - - - --- :;- '-
Notary Public
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN
COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED REZONING SUBDIVISION
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, PLANNED COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AND AMENDMENT AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT
PLAN TO ZONING ORDINANCE 47 FOR ROBERT DAVIS AND HERBERT
BLOOMBERG, CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the Planning Commission of the
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, will meet on Wednesday the 23rd day
of August, 1978, at 7:45 p.m. for the purpose of holding a public
hearing to consider: *a) proposed subdivision and b) rezoning from
R-lA Agricultural Residence District to P-1 Planned Residential
Development and P--3 Planned Community Development, and c) amendment
to Zoning Ordinance 47 to allow hotels as a permitted use in a
P-3 District and preliminary development plan for the proposed
development on the following described tract of land:
DESCRIPTION OF SOUTH END OF LOTUS LAKE
All that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter
(SE4 of SE4) and Government Lot Three (3), Section Twelve (12),
Township One Hundred Sixteen (116) North, Range Twenty Three.(23)
West lying north of the North Line of the right-of-way of State
Trunk Highway No. 101 (said North Line being also the North Line
of the abandoned right of way of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul
Railroad) and West of the following described line, to -wit -
Beginning at the intersection of West Line of the Southeast
Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE4 of SE4) of Section Twelve
(12) said Township One Hundred Sixteen (116), Range Twenty Three
(23) and the North Line of the right-of-way of State Trunk Highway
No. 101; thence North 50051' East along the North right-of-way
line of -said Highway No. 101 for a distance of 1314.29 feet to
the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence
North 220 01' 50" West to the shore of Lotus Lake and there terminating.
A plan shoeing said proposed rezoning .-ad subdivision is
available for inspection at the City Hall.
All persons interested may appear and be heard at said time
and place.
Dated: August 8, 1978
BY ORDER OF THE PLA_NNIlQG COMMISSION
Bob Waibel, Assistant City Planner
(Publish in'the Carver County Herald on August 9, 1978.)
Michael J. Max
!_, Ronald G. Horr
Lesley G. Arseth
7500 Chan Rd.
Excelsior, Mn. 55331
7510 Chan Rd.
1 Excelsior, Mn. 55331�
Rt. 4 - 7520 Chan Rd.
Excelsior, Mn.
55331
John Se3gnor
7530 Chanhassen Rd.
John Melb
� y
! 7540 Chanhassen Rd.
�
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Exc., Yin. 55331
Exc., Mn. 55331
'..Eden
Prairie, MN 55344
Dorn Builders
Chicago -Milwaukee, St.Pau'1
George Shorba
835 .3rd Ave.
Excelsior, Mn. 55331
and Pacific R.R.
3rd Ave. S. & Washington
!
f
306 Chan View
Chanhassen, Mn.
55317
Minneapolis, Mn.
Fred S chmitt
Mary Bushkowsky
rl:
John 'A. Peters
'15101 Highway 5
Hopkins, Yin.
206 78th St.
#`
7230 Frontier Tr.
i
i
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
1,
Chanhassen, Mn.
55317
�
kF
Michael Sorenson
John Jeurissen
Bernice Brokke
7606 Erie Ave.
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
205 Chan View
Chanhassen,-Mn. 55317
&
207 Chan View
Chanhassen, Mn.
55317
Donald Schmieg
k;
Dean Burdick
Duane Anderson
Box 397
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
Box 347
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
!
204 ChanView
Chanhassen, Mn.
55317
Craig M. Larson
€;
Gerald Neher
200 Chan View St.
Richard Peters
Box 86
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
;j
202 Chan View
E
Chanhassen Mn.
55317
�
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
�`
t
Jerome Wendt
7701 Erie Ave.
Chanhassen., MN
Robert Meuwissen
201 W. 77th St.
Chanhassen, MN
Jerome Kerber
207 W. 77th St.
Chanhassen, MN
Wayne Hagman
7602 Erie Ave.
55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317
f=.
p.
f< R. & J. Larson
K' 124 West Minnehaha Pkwy.
55317 Minneapolis, MN 55419
t-
F
Louise Fenger
e,
Box 396
55317 r Chanhassen, MN 55317
Robert Kahl
2.03 W. 77th St.
Chanhassen, ILN 55317
C. Schmieg
c/o D.A. Schmieg
Box 397
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Curtis Robinson
202 W. 77th St.
Chanhassen, ILN
D. Kerber
Paul Rojina
220 W. 77th St.
Chanhassen, 1\IN
Clark Horn
7608 Erie
Chanhassen, MN
Michael Sorenson
7606 Erie Ave.
Chanhassen, MN
55317
55317
William Cash
Box 34
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Earl MacAllister
7510 Erie Ave.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Harold Thieste-moved
7425 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Harvey Kruse
c/o Ken Lancey
Box 24
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Vern Zetah
7500 Erie
Chanhassen, 14N 55317
Timothy Gagnon
7508 Erie Ave.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Mr. Williarn Kirkvold
7423 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
t.
r..
Mr. Glenn 2-Zattson
7406 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
,
Mr. Eugene Coulter
7550 Great Plains Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
i
'• Mr. Ted deLancey
i 7505 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dorothy Bongard
7551 Great Plains Blvd.
Chanhassen, MN 5531.7
Mr. Vern Zetah
i 7500 Erie Ave.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Hansen and
Klingelhutz{
516 Del Rio
Drive
;
55317
Chanhassen,
MN 55317.E
•`+
i.
i
r:
Mr. C. Peter
Linsmay er
Box 391
� {
55317
Chanhassen,
MN 55317
Mr. Hubert Forcier
7500 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Mr. Ken Erickson
7203 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Mr.. Morlais Hughes
7343 Frontier Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
, �Idavit of Publication
Sate of Minnesota )
)SS.
County of Carver )
CITCA V]TOR AN BEI I— EN
NOTICE Op pOUNTIEgDjy tVE OT
REZONING UBLIC IJEARDYi.
TL4L DEVELOPME ISION PLANZyED PROPOSE
I
DEVELOpME T PLAIVNJKA D RESIDEN
PRELIMINARY DEVELOP AMEND COMMUNITY
ORDINANCE MENT px MENT AND
BLOOMBEAOR ERT D� yIS AND RING
BERT ROB
NOTICE IS RG' CHANHA38EPV • MINNESOTA.
Commission HEREBY GIVEN tha!
meet On We of the City of Chanhassen, the P
P•m, for �dnesday the 23rd da Mlnn lanntn9
consider: Purpose of holding August, 1978, at will
R•IA A a)p roposed subdivision public hea a' oto
gricultural g a d 1
Residential D Residence Dlaan btorezonin
triDevelopment,eveloptnent and P m
and c 3 Planned �� Panned
47 fl allow hotels as a perme�tdment to Zoaing coin
ounce
develu 'nenary developm plan use f a IP_y
pA1ent an the follomtn plan for District and
Book Of deeds 101, g describe =j�e proposed
555• Book of Deeds, Page 557 Book ofdE) of land:
604; Bonk of Deeds 98 , page 568, Book secs 101, pa
the south edge of Lotus $e 23; This of J� Weds 64 Page
A plan showing o Lakesaid. Proptlar" ty located at
dAllPe'ision s availablefor- Proposed sup.
All Persons spection reaoCIL and
said time interested me at the C3tyHa11
Dated: An.,..pace, yPPear and Ibe heard
`am McGarry , being duly sworn, on oath says he is anddutitig
stated has been the publisher and printer of the newspaper known as Carver County Herald and has full
ets herein stated as follows: (1) Said newspaper is printed in the English language in newspaper format
i sheet form equivalent in printed space to at least 900 square inches. (2) Said newspaper is a weekly
at least once a week. (3) Said news paper has 50% of its news columns devoted to news of local interest
which it purports to serve and does not wholly duplicate any other publication and is not made up
s, plate matter and advertisements. (4) Said newspaper is circulated in and near the municipality which
re, has at least 500 copies regularly delivered to paying subscribers, has an average of at least 75% of its
:urrently paid or no more than three months in arrears and has entry as second-class matter in its local
{aid newspaper purports to serve the City of Chaska in the County of Carver and it has its known
a the City of Chaska in said county, established and open during its regular bushiess hours for the
wa, sale of advertisements and sale of subscriptions and maintained by the managing officer of said
sons in its employ and subject to his direction and control during all such regular business hours and at
spaper is printed. (6) Said newspaper files a copy of each issue immediately with the State Historical
d newspaper has compiled with all the foregoing conditions for at least one year preceding the day or dates
nentioned below. (8) Said newspaper has filed with the Secretary of State of Minnesota prior to January 1,
January 1 thereafter an affidavit in the form prescribed by the Secretary of State and signed by the
:er of said newspaper and sworn to before a notary public stating that the newspaper is a legal newspaper.
ter states on oath that the printed -- Notice of Hear 1 n v
hereto attached as a part
a, 1978 at rut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published therein in the English language,
BY ORDER OF THE p= ANNINO week, for p9 th
One successive weeks; that it was first so ublished onWed. the
(Pub• in the Cary Bob Weibel, Asaie C030"haSSION �7�
er County Herald on ugust J _ 1978) ner la • - 19L and was thereafter printed and published on every to and
_ August 9� 1978)
JncT,.. _ the day of 19_ and that the following is a printed copy of the lower case alphabet
from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and
publication of said notice, to wit:
Subscribed and sworn to before me this _g
(Notarial Seal)
LORRAINE LAN:29,
NOTARY PUBLIC — MINN
CARVER COUNT
My Commission Expires June 982
rF
Notary public, County, Minnesgia
My Commission Expires 3 19
110)
Park & Recreation
,J Regular Meeting
Tuesday.,, August 1 s
City Hall
Commission Minutes
1978
Chairman Joe Betz called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. The members
present were Pat Boyle, Denis Stedman, Mary Muehlhausen and Phyllis Pope.
The members absent were Walter Coudron, and Shirley Chellis.
Phyllis Pope made a motion to accept the minutes of the last meeting.
Mary Muehlhausen seconded the motion. Motion passed.
The Commission reviewed the proposed development at the south end of Lotus
Lake by the Bloomberg Company. Pat Boyle expressed concern about the lack
of active play area for children which would be living in the development.
It might be a good idea to develop one of the proposed tennis courts into
a tot lot. Bob Waibel, ,Assistant City Planner, explained the concept of the
development. The Commission questioned what the city policy on conservation
and preservation of shoreline was. The Commission also wondered if a hotel
would be compatible with the residential area. There was concern expressed
about the ingress and egress in the devlopement.
The Commission reviewed the proposed amendment to Ordinance 14A to include
a levy on commercial, industrial and office development. Chairman Joe Betz
read several Ordinances which have been adopted by other communities. Denis
Stedman made a motion to use one of the Ordinances for a draft and ask that
commercial, industrial and office developers be required to dedicate 6 to 10%
of the gross acreage to the city for park purposes. Pat Boyle seconded the
motion. Motion passed unanimously.
The Commission reviewed the Long Range Capital Improvement Budget and will
set priorities to be reviewed and adopted at the September meeting.
Phyllis Pope would like the Carver Beach comments reviewed by the City Council
and acted on.
Denis Stedman moved to adjourn the meeting.
Motion passed.
Meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted
Francis Callahan
Community Services Director
Pat Boyle seconded the motion.
REZONING PETITION
CASE NO. REZ..
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST
Applicant:
Name: BLOOMBERG
Last
Date of Application 24 July 1978
Escrow Paid Date
Received by
HERBERT N.
First Initia
Address: 210 Sandy Hook Road Excelsior Minn. 55331
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Owner
Name: BLOOMBERG Cu l Q HERBERT N.
Last —In
Address: 210 Sandy Hook Road Excelsior, Minn. 55331
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Address of Property to be rezoned:
7400 and 7500 Chanhassen Road
Legal description of property to be rezoned:
See attached
Present zoning of property: R-lA
Present Use of property: agricultural
Proposed zoning of property: P 3
Proposed use of property:
residential - commercial
- 9 -
The following documents shall be attached to this application:
Date Received Initial
1. Site Plan
2. Elevation Drawings
3. Floor Plan
4. Landscape Plan
5. Drainage Plan
6. Abstractors Certificate
7. Signs
8. Escrow Account
I hereby declare that all statements made in this application and on
the attached documents are true, and that I shall reimburse the City
of Chanhassen for all City expenses incurred in processing this
application.
Sicfhature. of A plicant
Jo V 66t a -et 14fe5 .lr 0 kl>dep (te-,i
Signature of Pwner
Date
Received by Title Date
(Following to be completed by Zoning Administrator or City official)
I3RONOLOGY
Date By
Application on Planning Commission agenda
Planning Commission postponed to
Newspaper publication
Adjacent property owners notified
Public Ilearing
Planning Commission Action.
Application on Council Agenda
Council postponed to
Council action
Zoning Agreement Executed
Ordinance published
Zoning Map updated
Escrow returned - amount:
-10-
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On this day of , 19 , this rezoning
action was recommended for (approval), disapprova for the
following reasons:
Chairman ot: Planning Commission
Action by City:
On this day of 19 the Chanhassen
City Council, Carver. and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved),
(disapproved) this rezoning petition for the following reasons:
By Order of the Chanhassen
City Council
Mayor - - - -- --
Attest:
City Administrator
am
REZONING PETITION CASE NO. REZ.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST
Date of Application 24 July 1978
Escrow Paid Date
Received by
Applicant:
Name: DAVIS ROBERT J.*
Last First Initial
Address: 4212 Alden Drive Edina. Minn. 55416
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Owner
Name: DAVIS ROBERT
Last First
Address: 4212 Alden Drive Edina
Number and Street City
Address of Property to be rezoned:
7600 Chanhassen Road
Legal description of property to be rezoned:
See attached
J.
Initia
Minn. 55416
State Zip Code
Present zoning of property: R - 1
Present Use of property: one single family residence
Proposed zoning of property:P -
Proposed use of property: 5 lots single family residence
4
WE
The following documents shall be attached to this application:
Date Received Initial
1. Site Plan.
2. Elevation Drawings
3. Floor Plan
4. Landscape Plan
5. Drainage Plan
6. Abstractors Certificate
7. Signs
3. Escrow Account
I hereby declare that all statements made in this application and on
the attached documents are true, and that I shall reimburse the City
of Chanhassen for all City expenses incurred in processing this
appi4-sra�iorX.(--\ n
Sig- ture of/Ap�cant
Signature 0Vow/ner
D a t4f
Received by Title Date
(Following to be completed by Zoning Administrator or City official)
CHRONOLOGY
Date By
Application on Planning Commission agenda
Planning Commission postponed to
lewspaper publication
Adjacent property owners no ti L-�_rd
Public IIearing
Planning Commission Action
Application on Council Agenda
Council postponed to
council action
Zoning Agreement Executed
Ordinance published
Zoning Map updated
Escrow returned - amount:
.. .0
-10-
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On this. day of , 19 , this rezoning
action was recommend a for (approval)-, disapprova for the
following reasons:
Chairman of Planning Commission
Action by City:
On this day of , 19 , the Chanhassen
City Council, Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved),
(disapproved) this rezoning petition for the following reasons:
Attest:
City Administrator
By Order of the Chanhassen
City Council
Mayor
�� �'� ►��� / � = "'OCR
i • y '•� 1. �
~� /I; • �\ Lotus •
eke Lucy I'I • • • • • •..�. • `� ; ` ��_� PL
''tea_-`�-..�-..� • • • • • ,•
PK
OF I
;i OF • •' ti Lake ,
.eke Ann
/i
PK • OF
/� ': •� G,� jam:: ,��• I
I ...... Cc
= i
Or
w« '
U I .: ��`•� • •• 240
O
_ e ,
VAH OF RB I"ter cN o I io + -: 7 9� OF
I. ,
• LI FB IB• ♦ 5y0
OF t�� • •F •F
�5 R9
® (0_�
5" •d ••
R--a
PACIFIC �� � ��'• � .• � _
• •' � sv �r,� T
OF
IVY
PX
OF
^�
l
1� Lake Susan
1,. ��: •� Rice
Marsh
Lake_ \ ;
OF
OF • •
•F
OF
OF I
34C3
• 34�!]
OF • • • �J
• OLYMAN PL BOULEVARD •• • � � �y
I -I
i
_ •F � C
<PK I•I' .. Lake
• l•
•., Riley
—�- • OF
• �.. \�� -
2.1400-1
11
e sonr—
w1
O �Os moo. ��pV •
a ar�p
aQo
• • ••. I&
cc�cc::^o c rfp
wall
• ci'� ncai un cvlo� s� ��I
ap coo nn nL] 4 1
[] rya no er
Y' =x1:,
1 A
.■II M 3
MME
INE`
�-
•F '
• OF
b
u •.
'= I F e
• PK
OF
Lake Susan
ri Rice,
• • Marsh
LakeOF
��
•F •
OF
OF
OF
OF C
34
34 O
C3
I � � • • � ^ O 3900
34
4,!571r/C. 4as�xAc 0.
FIGURE 4
ALTERNATIVE ACCESS PLANS
Alternate I Minimal Frontage Road
To Lyman Boulevard Alternate 2 -Complete Frontage Road
To Lyman Boulevard
t- .
TO MTS
Development
Alternate 3 7 Complete Frontage Road with Median on
T.H. 5 Extended Across Dakota
.Median on T.H. 5
-------------
J
Major roadway
t
I
G
.999
--,900
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O. BOX 147+CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: July 24, 1978
TO: Planning Commission, Staff, Robert J. Davis, 4212 Alden Drive,
Edina, MN 55416, and Herbert Bloomberg, 7008 Dakota, Excelsior
FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: South Lotus Lake Planned Unit Development, Proposed Preliminary
Development Plan Review
APPLICANTS: Robert J. Davis and Herbert N. Bloomberg
PLANNING CASE: P-566
P'eti tion
The petition at hand is review -the proposed preliminary development
plans of Mr. Davis and Mr. Bloomberg as prescribed by Ordinance 47,
Planned Unit Development Review and Procedures.
Planner's 'Comments
1. The Planning Commission conducted sketch plan review of the proposed
subdivision and planned unit development at it's regular meeting on
June 28, 1978.
2. Significant changes between the sketch plan and the present proposed
preliminary development plan, is the plan consideration of the entire
Bloomberg property, a portion of which was previously designated as
outlot A and had no plans proposed. The newly proposed plans purport
minuscule changes for the Davis property. The aforementioned changes
to the Davis property include the assignment of 100' x 290' parcel in
lot 4 with the Bloomberg property, and the inclusion of a 33' utility
easement/pedestrian way, which is to serve the lift station located on
lot 1 of the Davis subdivision, and the designated common area located
on lot 8 of block 1 of the Bloomberg proposal, and the provision of
access to lot 4 of the Davis subdivision by an entry way in the alignment
of the present driveway on the subject property and another entry way
in the form of a private drive off of the cul-de-sac abutting the Davis
property.
. -1
Planning Commission -2- July 24, 1978
3. The proposed preliminary plans for the Bloomberg property has incor-
porated many major changes from the sketch plan and involves for the most
part the southern 2/3 of the property. This was a result of the staff's
recommendation that plans be submitted that wouuld indicate how the entire
parcel will potentially be developed. The new plans show a continuation
of the road pattern through what was previously called outlot A. Along
these added streets are lots planned for a combination of single family
residential, zero lot line townhouses, apartments, and a 60 unit hotel
services facility. From the plans submitted it appears that single family
dwellings are planned for all of blocks 1, 2, and 3, and lots 9, 10 and 11
of block 4. Conversely from the plans submitted it is apparent that
zero lot��line townhouses are planned for lots 1 - 8 and lots 12-17 of
block 4. At the southern extension of block 4, there is planned a
twelve unit apartment building at the end of a cul-de-sac off of the entry
way into the development, and at the southeastern corner of the proposed
development is proposed the 60 unit hotel.
4. Soils on the subject property are of the Hayden complex and have
overall good building characteristics. As best can be deciphered from
the small scale soils reference maps, the only area of potential soil
problems is. in the vicinity of the proposed common area, however, very
few soil groups have limiting affects upon the type of proposed use and
additionally, site specific soil studies may prove this to be also
included in the Hayden complex. Slope analysis likewise is furnished
on a small scale basis and does indicate that slope will be of consideration
in the northern 1/3 of the proposed development wherein special attention
may have to be paid during the preliminary development plan review.
The applicant should furnish the staff with preliminary development
plans as prescribed by ordinance with contours at verfical intervals
of not more than two feet.
5. Before the next presentation of this subject proposal, the applicant
should supply information detailing the proposed phasing of the
development. This phasing information should illustrate the single
family residential and the single family attached townhouses as they
are shown presently, and the hotel and apartment areas should be designated
as outlots with their scope, future identity, and timing of development,
spelled out in the development contract. In this manner the hotel
complex and the apartment area can be dealt with as an amendment to the
development contract so as to assure that sound site planning principals
are applied to these two facilities as they develop.
6. As can be seen from the submitted plans, the applicant has. proposed
right of ways of 60 feet for the interior streets and 50 feet for the
cul-de-sacs, with the exception of 33 foot roadways to serve lift
station, the hotel complex and the apartment facility. For the interior
streets,subdivision ordinance would require only a 50 foot right of way,
however, on the cul-de-sacs, the same ordinance requires 60 feet of
right of way. Developer's proposal of the previously mentioned 33 foot
roadways, can potentially be acceptable provided that they be designated
as private roads with easements dedicated to the city for fire and
emergency vehicles access and in the neglect of maintenance, the city
would have the right to provide the needed maintenance and assess it
back to the abutting properties.
A Planning C.ommission -3- July 24, 1978
7. The applicant has proposed an entrance to trunk highway 101 at the
point directly across from the western entrance of the Chanhassen
Meadows Apartments as per previous recommendations of the Minnesota
Department of Transportation. As you remember this recommendation was
forthcoming from a letter dated 1974 which also included a recommendation
that 27 feet of right of way be designated to the municipality for
the entire length of the development in order to allow enough room
for necessary future construction along TH 101 as development occurs.
In light of the fact that these recommendations are significantly post
dated, the regional office Minnesota Dept. of Transportation was
requested to do a quantification of this new proposal which is anticipated
to be delivered to staff prior to the preliminary development plan
review stage.
8. At this time, this office would request that the developer briefly
explain the placement of a potential residential structure on lot 10
block 1 and if there are any special design considerations for a lot
such as this having three frontages on a public street. Additionally,
I would like to discuss the workability of the tennis court indicated
on lot 8 block 1 and it's relative nearness to houses to be located on
lots 7 and 9. It is my understanding that this is somewhat of a
judgement call as to whether the future residences of lots 7 and 9 would
consider their closeness to a tennis court either a disamenity due to
i.t'�s possible constant use, or consider it to be an amenity simply
because of it's juxtaposition to the surrounding property.
9. It is my responsibility through zoning ordinance 47 to reiterate
to the planning commission the nature of the intersections of Hill St.
and MTH 101 and that through the purpose of subdivision and planning,
the planning commission and staff should be aware that our actions will
determine into perpetuity the condition of said access and it's relation-
ship to this proposal.
Planner's Recommendation
I recommend that the planning commission conditionally order a public
hearing to be held on August 23rd with said conditions being that the
applicant submit preliminary development plans in compliance with
section 7 and 8 of subdivision ordinance 33, and, with said plans
demonstrating mitigation of the issues setforth in this report and
at this meeting, and that said plans are submitted to the planning
office on or before August 7, 1978.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O BOX 147+CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
• : xh cam* i'
DATE: June 23, 1978 1
TO: Planning Commission, Staff, and Robert J. Davis, 4212 Alden
Drive - Edina, Mn. 55416, and Herb Bloomberg, Route 4
Box 497 - Excelsior, Mn. 55331
FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: South Lotus Lake Subdivision and Planned Unit Developement
APPLICANTS: Robert J. Davis and Herb N. Bloomberg
PLANNING CASE: P-566
Pai-i i-i nn
Petition before the Planning Commission is a joint application for
sketch plan review of a proposed subdivision and planned residential
development on the South Shore of Lotus Lake.
Back,7round
1. Community Location: As shown in enclosure 1, the subject property
is directly across Minnesota Trunk Highway 101 from the Chanhassen
Meadows Apartments and is bounded on the north by Lotus Lake.
2. Existing Zoning: The subject property under the ownership of
Mr. Davis is presently zoned R-1, Single Family Residence District,
and the property owned by Mr. Bloomberg is presently zoned R-lA,
Agricultural Residence District.
3. Utilities: Sanitary sewer and municipal water are presently
available to the subject properties.
4. Comprehensive Plan Proposals:
a. Land Use: Pursuant to the adopted Comprehensive Plan, the
subject property and its environs are to assume and maintain a single
family residential identity.
b. Transportation: Pursuant to the adopted City Transportation
Plan, Erie Avenue and West 77th Street are to function as local streets,
and MTH No. 5 is to function as a secondary highway.
` P-566 -2- June 23, 1978
Planner's Comments
1. For purposes of review, it should be pointed out at this time
that the property owned by Mr. Davis is that property contiguous
to and along the eastern 808 feet of Bloomberg property. (reference
enclosure 2.) As shown in enclosure 2, Mr. Davis is proposing to
gain access to lots 1, 2 & 3 of his proposed subdivision through a
proposed road traversing the Bloomberg property from Erie Avenue.
It's for this reason that these two proposals be simultaneously
considered.
2. Mr. Davis is proposing to subdivide approximately 2.53 acres into
5 single-family residential building sites. Mr. Bloomberg is proposing
a planned residential development along the western and northern portion
of the property indicated in enclosure 2, containing 24 single family
residential building sites.
3. In 1974, the area proposed to be developed by Mr. Bloomberg, was
under plan review for a townhouse development proposal which was
subsequently discontinued. one issue of pertinence that arose from
this previous review and is appropriately applicable to the sketch
plan review -of the current proposal, is the issue of access onto Minnesota
Trunk Highway 101. In a September 25, 1974, letter from R. A. Elasky,
District 5 Layout -Research and Development Engineer, to the then acting
City Manager of Chanhassen, had recommended that entrances to the
property be aligned with those on the east side of Trunk Highway 101
i.e. the Chanhassen Apartment entrances. This was proposed to accomplish
the following:
a. It would eliminate jog intersections which tend to create
problems for left turning vehicles to the development.
b. It would maintain the current number of intersections on
Trunk Highway 101 at two intersections.
C. It would tend to keep pedestrian crossings: on Trunk Highway 101
at two locations.
Additionally, it was recommended that the developer of the property
provide standard right turn lanes to each street where they intersect
Trunk Highway 101. It is my opinion that this should be construed
so as to include the Chanhassen Meadows Apartments at this time. And
lastly it was recommended that 27 feet of right-of-way be dedicated to
the municipality for the entire length of the development in order to
allow enough room for necessary future construction along Trunk Highway
101 as development occurs.
In consideration of the 1974 comments of Mr. Elasky, I would recommend
that the cul-de-sac along Mr. Davis' property be continued southward
to a point where it would intersect Minnesota Trunk Highway 101
directly across from the eastern most Chanhassen Meadows entrance.
This will necessarily result in Mr. Davis having to add onto lots 3, 4
and 5 so that they may front on the newly proposed public street.
(Reference enclosure 3) In conjunction with this alteration, the
present access off of Trunk Highway 101 known as Hill Street, should
be vacated and rerouted across Mr. Davis' property to the newly
P-566
-3- June 23, 1978
proposed entrance to Trunk Highway 101. The western limb of Hill
Street may be totally vacated and returned to its natural state
whereas the eastern limb of Hill Street should be maintained and
cul-de-saced at its eastern most point. It is my belief, that this
will eliminate an already dangerous entrance onto Trunk Highway 101
and will identically provide these properties on Hill Street with
a newer and safer access. (Reference enclosure 3.)
4. The western most egress from the development proposed by Mr.
Bloomberg, will distribute the traffic between Brie Avenue and
West 77th Street. When Outlot A is developed, the second access
onto Highway 101 directly from the development should be considered.
5. The adopted shoreline management ordinance requires 16,000 sq.
foot lots for sewered areas on Lotus Lake to which all the lots in
this proposal comply.
G. Lot 4 of Block 1 of the Bloomberg development, should be altered
so as to have a frontage more consistent with those of the surrounding
lots.
7. Pursuant to Ordinance,plans should be submitted showing how and
when the remainder of the property is anticipated to be developed.
8. Planning Commission at this time should restrict their comments
to the consistency of the proposal to Chanhassen's plans for land
use, zoning, transportation, and utilities.
Planner's Recommendation
I find the plan submitted by Mr. Davis and Mr. Bloomberg to be
generally in accordance with the City's plans for these properties,
with the exception of the above stated suggestions regarding the
access to 101 and the frontage of Lot 4.Block 1. I recommend that
the Planning Commission encourage the applicants to proceed with
preliminary development plans.
OF
i • t /
PK
Lotus '� •`�
Lake Lucy • • • •.� �Y
PK • ..o-_.,._ 3t a wig~+" • • `s
OF
Lake Ann
__/--' a a."� ` e f 1 "{ ; t ��� •ate � : �. +.
OF
PK
aj
j�_-t�.•t.i•
JI
o
fm" E� • I Rq
OF OF
I �J
l\\ a4 5 •'
7f v�GlFt _ ,I l- 1 OFe o +•.�
QD
OF
•LJB '
I
OF - - - - • PK - 0 p�4- •� �1
— -_
I -- Lake Susan
! • Rice —
• Marsh
i c • Lake
OF
•F j
• 11
OF
OF
1 OF
OF I
- 34
34 O
34
• ;-•�,` 34�34
OF s s
LYMAN PL BOULEVARD NO• • '� 1 \�_
� I lII
j • Lf
I _
OF
PK •. _ Lake
•i ® Riley
• OF • I
-50-
SUBDIVISION PLAN
CASE NO. SUB.
City of Chanhassen
Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST
Applicant
Name:_ DA V/5
Last
Address:
r and Street
Owner: D4V/45
Last
Date of Application Mqq - /5 ^ 76
Escrow Paid Date!
Received by
8 �T _
First Initial
City State Zip Code
_ODEX
First
Address: -Z/-? Azav D_ Eomm
Number and Street City
Address of property in question:
7& OO
Legal description"of property in question: '
Initial
State Zip Code
Present zoning of property:
Present use of property:- QA/E E1AJ 4 ZE /;LOY/ ¢y ; ES/OEAtC E
Proposed use of property:
S'iN G c.E
/L V Moe Sr040U CC
The following documents if appropriate shall be attached to this
application:
Date Received
1. Sketch Plan
2. Preliminary Plat
Initial
3. Escrow Account
-51-
Date Received
4. Abstractor's Certificate
5. Final Plat
Initial
I hereby declare that all statements made in this application and on
the attached documents are truer and that I shall reimburse the City
for all expenses incurred in processing this application for sub-
division.
Signature 6�f Applicant
aj
Signature ner
/S - 76
Date - -- ---- - -
Received by Title Date
(Following to be completed by Zoning Administrator or City Official)
CHRONOLOGY
------DATE
BY
Sketch Plan on Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed to
Preliminary Plat on
Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed .to
Newspaper Publication
Adjacent Property Owners Notified
Public Hearing
Planning Commission Action
Preliminary Plat on
Council Agenda
_.
Council Postponed to
Council Action
Final Plat on
Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed to
Planning Commission Action
Final Plat on Council Agenda
Council Postponed to
Council Action
Final Contract Executed
Escrow Returned - Amount:
--52-
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (Preliminary Plat)
On this day of 19 , this preliminary plat
was recommended for (approval), (disapproval) subject to the
following conditions:
Chairman -of Planning Commission
Action by City - Preliminary Plat
On this day of 19 , the Chanhassen City
Council, Carver and He:cxnepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved)
this Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions:
By order of the Chanhassen
City Council -
Attest:
City Administrator
-53-- ,
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION - Final Plat
On this day of 19 , this Final
Plat was recommended for (approval), disapproval) subject to the
following conditions:
Chairman of Planning Commission
Action by City - Final Plat
On this day of 19 the Chanhassen City
Council, Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved)
this Final Plat subject to the following conditions:
By order of the Chanhassen
City Council.
Mayor
Attest:
City Administrator
� 1
you
44
Beginning at a point on the Northwesterly boundary line of the Chicago, Milwaukee,
and St. Paul Railway (H. D. Div.) where the same crosses Sec. 12, Township 116,
Range 23, which point is 246.6 feet in a Sally direction from the SE corner of land
deeded by Frank Mlinar and wife to William Mason by deed dated Mar. 22, 1909
recorded in Carver County, in Book 22 of Deeds page 43, thence running Nally at right
angles'to said boundary line of said right-of-way 225 feet; thence Southwesterly
parallel with said boundary line of said right-of-way 350 feet; thence at right
angles SEly 225 feet to said right-of-way; thence NEly along the line of.said
right-of-way 350 feet to place of beginning, Carver Co.
Also a strip 50 feet wide extending from the Nally boundary line of land hereby
conveyed to the shore of Long Lake, the center line of which 50 feet strip is coinci-
dent with that part of the followed described line which lies outside the boundary
of the land herein above conveyed, viz: Beginning at a point on the NWly boundary
line of the above mentioned right of way which is 25.32 feet Sally from the point of
beginning first above mentioned running thence NWly at an angle of 81944' (N 300 W)
with said boundary line of said right of way 775 ft. to the shore of Long Lake the
land herein conveyed being 2.53 acres.
And beginning at a point in the East line of the SEA,,- of Section 12, Township 116,
Range 23, distant i403.58 feet South of the NE Corner of the SE-1, of Section 12.,
Township 116, Range 23, thence angle right 50035' and along the Northwesterly boundary
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway (Hasting and Dakota Division) a
distance of 232.1 feet to the actual point of beginning which point is the most
Southerly corner of the plat of Sunset View; thence continue along said Northwesterly
boundary line a distance of 14.5 feet; thence angle right 98016' a distance of 671.04
feet to the intersection with the Southwesterly line of Lot 14, Block 1, Sunset View;
thence Southeasterly along the Southwesterly line of Lot 14, Block 1 and Southwesterly
line of Hill Street, Sunset View a distance of 671.20 feet to point of beginning,
Carver County, Minnesota.
EXCEPTING therefrom all that part of the above described premises lying Vicst of the
following described line, to wit: Beginning at the intersection of W. line of the
SE- of the SEA of Sec. 12-116-23 and the N. line of the right-of-wayof State Trunk
Highway No. 101; th. N. 50051' East along the N. right-of-way line of said. Highway
No. 101 for a di.st. of 1314.29 ft. to the actual pt. of beg. of the line -to be descr.;
th. 22001150" W. to the shore of Lotus Lake and there terminating.
-50- ��...4
SUBDIVISION PLAN
CASE NO. SUB.
City of Chanhassen
Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST
Date of Application 16 May 1978
Escrow Paid Date
Received by
Applicant
Name: _ BLOOMBERG HERBERT _ N .
Last First Ini tial _
Address: Rt. 4, Box 497 Excelsior Minn. 55331
Number and Street City State -Zip Code
Owner: Bloomberg Companies Incorporated
La. st First rn; +-; a 5
Address: West 78th Street Chanhassen Minn. 55317
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Address of property in question:
7600 - 7700 block Chanhassen Road
Legal description of -property in question:
- -,'-'- --•hment
Present zoning of property: R-lA
Present use of property: argicultural
Proposed use of 'property: single family residential
The following documents if appropriate shall be attached to this
application:
Date Received Initial
1. Sketch Plan
2. Preliminary Plat
3. Escrow Account
r'
-51-
Date Received
4. Abstractor's Certificate
5. Final Plat
Initial
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 sub-
division.
ignature of Applicant
T_
Bloomberg Companies Incorporated
Signature of Owner
16 May 1978
Date
Received by Title
(Following to be completed by Zoning Administrator or City Official)
Date
CHRONOLOGY
Sketch Plan on Planning Commi_ss on Agenda
-DATE
BY
---
Planning Commission Postponed to
Preliminary Plat on
Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed.to
Newspaper Publication
Adjacent Property Owners Notified
Public Hearing
Planning Commission Action
Preliminary Plat on
Council Agenda
Council Postponed to
Council Action'
Final Plat on
Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed to
Planning Commission Action
Final Plat on Council Agenda
Council Postponed to
Council Action
Final Contract Executed
Escrow Returned - Amount:
DESCRIPTION OF SOUTH END OF LOTUS LAKE
All that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter
(SE4 of SE4) and Government Lot Three (3), Section Twelve (12),
T,ownship One Hundred Sixteen (116) North, Range Twenty Three (23)
West lying north of the North Line of the.right-of-way of State
Trunk Highway No. 101 (said North Line being also the North Line
of the abandoned right of way of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul
Railroad) and West of the following described line, to -wit:
Beginning at the intersection of West Line of the Southeast
Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE4 of SE4) of Section Twelve
(12) said Township One Hundred Sixteen (116), Range Twenty Three
(23). and the North Line of the right-of-way of State Trunk Highway
No. 101; thence North 50051' East along the North right-of-way
line of said Highway No. 101 for a distance of 1314.29 feet to
the actual point of beginning of the line to -be described; thence
North 220 O1' 50" West to the shore of Lotus Lake and there terminating.
Excepting therefrom the following:
1. That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter
of Section 12, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, described as
follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of Block 3, St. Hubertus
Addition to Chanhassen, being a point of the West line of the
Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 12
a distance of 699 feet North of the Southwest corner of said
quarter quarter section; thence Easterly along the Northerly line of
said Block 3 extended a distance of 150 feet; thence,Southerly and
parallel with the West line of said Southeast Quarter of the South-
east Quarter of Section 12 to the Northerly right-of-way line of
State Trunk Highway No. 101; thence Southwesterly along said Northerly
right-of-way line to its intersection with the West line of said
Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 12; thence
Northerly along said West line to the place of beginning.
2. That part of Government Lot 3 said Section 12 described as
follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of Block 3, St. Hubertus
Addition to Chanhassen, being a point on the West line of the
Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 12,
a distance of 699 feet North of the Southwest corner of said
quarter quarter section; thence Northerly along the West line of
the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter and the West line
of Government Lot 3 said Section 12 for a distance of 1030.20 feet
to the actual point of beginning of the land to be described;
thence.on a bearing of South 890 59' 48" East for a distance of
115.00 feet; thence on a bearing of North NOo 0' 12" East parallel
with the said West line of Government Lot.3 for a distance of
283.64 feet, more or less to the water's edge of Lotus Lake;
thence Northeasterly along said water's edge of Lotus Lake to
the point of intersection with the West line of Government
Lot 3; thence South along the West line of said Government
Lot 3 to the point of beginning.
--52-
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (Preliminary Plat)
On this day of 19 , this preliminary plat
was recommended for (approval) , disapproval) subject to the
following conditions:
Chairman of Planning Commission
Action by City - Preliminary Plat
On this day of 19 , the Chanhassen City
Council, Carver and He.n.nepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved)
this Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions:
By order of the Chanhassen
City Council
Attest:
City Administrator
R x,
4 �
--53-
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION - Final Plat
On this day of 19 , this Final
Plat was recommended for (approval) , (disapproval) subject to the
following conditions:
Chairman of Planning Commission
Action by City - Final Plat
On this day of 19 the Chanhassen City
Council, Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved)
this Final Plat subject to the following conditions:
By order of the Chanhassen
-City Council-
Im
Mayor
Attest:
City Administrator
bLUNESOTA 12W1RCXk4EWTAL, 00pzai'X FCAiI March z, 1978
K"WIRCMWIAL POTLEW Pia"...(' ,R[-z�i
DISTRIFU ICU LIST
Suite Pl-,L-roving A-Tency
Peter V ndec:�:0al, C_hai.rnan (EX2B)
Director, State Planning Agency
Roan 101, Capitol Sere Building
5511 C.e<3a:: Street
at, Paul, 1-1-N 55101 1 copy
'. rll F.u? la l ('_C )
4Larager, Envirornrenml m9rat. Prograns
ELx-ra 100, C pitol Squaxe Building
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 55101 1 copy
'�cvzs x� ticxz
"-JalrQS Y.HrrLrY_ton, CarriSsianer (FQB)
i?:� ari�nert cf 'l�rLspo�i-aticaZ
Et,cfT 411, Pranspo:,--taticn Building
John Yrelwxl Elvd.
S;:. Pazl trW 55155 1 copy
DLcaxtnert of Transportation
-F14yxT 3`4-C T-Lansportati on Building
�c ng
St. Paul, 1,9N 5.5155 1 cCW
Pollution Control Agency
Sandraa Grdek�ri:g, Director (FQBj
NN Pollution Control Agency
1935 nest County Road B2
Ros?ville, 111N 55113 1 copy
(;larel JoLann8S (IC)
1AN Tblluticui C'c::ntrol Agency
1935 'West DLLinty Road B2
i`cosevil.le, ML�T 55113 2 copies
Natural Resources
S°IM17 ;v; 2, Cc - ctissioner (F)B)
Department of Nlatu=al Pesot=es
7idicl Floor Centennial Building
65S C.�clar Street
St. Paul, I%� 55155 1 copy
Vorry F-:�jan (`iti:) .
1'z!I-Irttuert of r;ab ra! Pesources
Tnircl ?'1x:r Centermi.al Building
65E Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 551.55 2 copies
Fn irc,rme_nta1 Quality -•?oard Staff
'"•� \/ `---
�:'T�.12T� :ilfi�.-lSi3Z1, E�t:i112!.1ST..L'a�OY' A
R--an 1t10, Capitol Square Building
550 G=cac Street
St. Paul, MN 55101 1 CoPy
Fhv.iromer_cal Reri'�✓ Program
1 yfr
P;cxt 100, Captta3l Sx_Vu-- Buildirx0
550 rxlx Str et
St. Paul, MN 55101 6 copies
P.gr.•iculture
Wil Walker, Ccv -rissio*>Fx (EQS)
Department of A(riuj1t are
Rom 420, State Office Euilcling
St. Pahl, MN .515155 1 CX)pV
Depaz - t of T�gricul Lure
f ,;•_ECY 55i1, State Office ?iLiId'L- j
St. Paul, NN 55155 1 ocrpy
Health
Warren Lawson, Ceimissjoni-r (L)Q,,j)
Depart tint. of Health
717 Delar3re Strut S.E.
MinnPaj;o17--, MN 55440 1 copy
Department Of Health
717 Delaware Str—t S.E.
Mi -ineapoiis, MN 55440 1_ ropey
irxly F<gency
John M i,Cne, Dire --tor (BQB)
IN hhe..r_gy Agency
740 Prrerican Center D il.diskg
150 East Ke.Licrjg Blv(3.
St. IVIU, r111 55101 1 - py.
R,aren Cole Uc).
M Yi�lergy Agency
740 P,roerican Center Bu:i1cli rs
150 Fast Kellogg Bivr3.
St. Paul, D;.Y 55101 1 copy
Covpxnor's Off.iCe
rt� leer 3 �0, State Capitol
!' St. Paul, MN. 55155 1 copy
Histo cat' ; ety
Russell W. Pridley
Fort Snelliryg Branch
Fort Snelling, Building 25
St. Paul, JLN, 55111 1
Carps of Bigi
Dave Parscis, Caief
Lrv'iror --ntal Regu atony Divi.`,i..ori
1135 U.S. Post Office
St. Pahl_, ivEN 55101 1 c ,Lnr
Emrirorsrenta_l Conservation Lik:-at-1
300 Nioal.le`14all
Minneacnlis, MN 55101 2 copies
FOR EJFxiAL�t .L&CR'I.ATION i;FS.'YiRTiCCf, 'I`H.T.S LIST CONTACT: L",` tPMLATTON (612) 296-2723
Ar'IFLOXL`IAIELY 32 COPIES 1,TM:ED FOR DISTt?LciJ' IG1]
Peter ilanderpuel , Chairman('EQB)';
Director, St. Planning Agency
Rm, 101 , Capitol Square Bldg.
5�0 Cedar Street 11
St. Paul, MN 55101
Tom Rulland (TC)
Manager, Environmental Mgrnt.
Building
550 Cedar Street
St: Paul, MN 55101
James Harrington, Comm. (EQB)
Dept. of Transportation
Rm. 411, Transportation Bldg.
John Ireland Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155
Randy Halvorson (TC)
Dept. of Transportation
Rm. 807, Transportation Bldg.
John Ireland Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155
Sandra Gardebring, Dir: (EQB)
MN Pollution Control Agency
1935 West County Rd. B2
Roseville, MN 55113
Clarence Johannes (TC)
IrN Pollution Control Agency
1935 West County Rd. B2
Roseville, MN 55113
William Nye, Comm. (EQB)
Deot. of Natural Resources
3rd Floor Centennial Bldg.
653 Cedar Street
St. Paul , MhN 55155
Donny Hagen (TC)
Dept. of Natural Resources
",rd Floor Centennial Bldg.
658 Cedar Street
St'. Paul , i'IN 55155
Mary Sullivan, Administrator
Envoronmental Quality Board
Rm. 100, Capitol Square Bldg.
550 Cedar Street
St_ Paul , 11,14 55101
Environmental Review Program
Rm. 100, Capitol Square Bldg.
550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Mid 55101
William Walker, Comm. (EQB)
Dept. of Agriculture
Rr;, 420, St. Office Bldg.
5;. Paul, MN 55155
Shirley Rutherford (TC)
Dept. of Agriculture
Rm. 563, St. Office Bldg
St. Paul, MN 55155
Warren Lawson, Comm. (EQB)
Department of Health
717 Delaware Street S.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55440
Laura Oatman (TC)
Department of Health
717 Delaware Street S.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55440
John Millbone, Director (EQB)
MN Energy Agency
740 American Center Bldg.
150 East Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55101
Karen Cole (TC)
MN Energy Agency
740 American Center Bldg.
150 East Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55101
Bob Ambrose (EQB)
Governor's Office
Gov's. Rep.
RPM. 122, State Capitol
St. Paul , MN 55155
Russell W. Fridley
Historical Society
Fort Snelling Branch
Fort Snelling, Bldg. 25
St. Paul, MN 55111
Dave Parson, Chief
Corps of Engineers
Environmental Regulatory Div.
1135 U.S. Post Office
St. Paul, MN 55101
Environmental Conservation
Library
300 Nicollet Mall
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Carver County Zoning Office
Carver County -Court House
Chaska, MN 55318
2/8/77
I.
MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)
,d AND NOTICE OF FINDINGS
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE
0 E.R. #
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)
aNegative Declaration (No EIS) 0 EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required)
B. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION
1. Project name or title South Lotus Lake Addition
2. Project proposers) Bloomberg Companies Incorporated
Address West"78th Street, Chanhassen Minn 55317
Telephone Number and Area Code ( 612 ) 934-1500
3. Responsible Agency or Person City of Chanhassen
Address 7610 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen, Minn. 55317
Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information
on this EAW: Robert 14aibel Telephone 612-474-8885
4. This EAW and other supporting documentation are available for public in-
spection and/or copying at: Location CitV of Chanhassen AdministrativF Offices
Telephone 612-474-8885 _—Hours 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM
5. Reason for EAW Preparation
51
Mandatory
Category -cite
Petition I (Other
��))
MEQC Rule
number (s)
l�
C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
1. Project location
County Carver _City/Township name City of Chanhassen
To.-Mship number 116 (North), Range Number 23—East or West (circle one),
Section number(s) 12 Street address (if in city) or legal description:
see attached sheet
- 1 -
Gil
2. Type and scope of proposed project:
3. Estimated starting date (month/year), 15 October 1978
4. Estimated completion date (month/year) October 1981
5. Estimated construction cost $7-.9,000,000
6. List any federal funding involved and known permits, or approvals needed
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)
City of Chanhassen
Planned Unit Development I I pending
7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS
be prepared under the National'Environmental Policy Act?_ —NO YES UNKNOWN
II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
A. Include the following maps or drawings:
1. A map showing the regional location of the project.
2. An original 812 x 11 section of'a U.S.G.S. 7� 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.
The site is presently used for agriculture and the adjacent land
is used for single family and multiple dwelling residential with
public utilities
2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the site that are:
a. Urban developed 1 acres f. Wetlands (Type III, IV, V) acres
b. Urban vacant acres g. Shoreland 935 feet frontage —acres
C. Rural developed acres h. Flooc3pl.ain on Lotus Lake acres
d. Rural vacant acres i. Croplancl/Pasture land 19 acres
e. Designated Recre- acres j. Forested 3 acres
ation/Open Space
- 2 -
3. List names and sizes of lakes, rivers and streams on or near -the site,
particularly lakes within 1,000 feet and rivers and streams within
300 feet.
Lotus Lake - 240 acres
C. Activity Description
1. Describe the proposed activity, including staging of 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).
22 single family residential
28 residential units
1 12 unit apartment building
1 60 unit hotel
2. Fill in the following where applicable:
a. Total project area nacres g. Size of marina and access -0- sq. ft.
channel (water area)
Length miles h. Vehicular traffic trips
generated per day 750 ADT
b. Number of housing or
recreational units 122
c. Height of structures 40 ft.
d. Number of parking
i. Number of .employees •30
j. Water supply needed 35,000 gal/da
Source: City of Chanhassen
spaces 250 k. Solid waste requiring
disposal 300 tons/yr
e. Amount of dredging -0- cu. yd.
1. Commercial, retail or
f. Liquid wastes requir- industrial floor space 90,000 sq. ft.
ing treatment 30,000 gal/da with covered.parking
III. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
A. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY
1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently
exceeding 120-? No X Yes
2. Are there other geologically unstable areas involved in the project,
such as fault zones, shrink -swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes? X NO YES
3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slope conditions or unstable area and any
measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impacts.
slope conditions ragne from 12% to 30%
- 3 -
4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual septic
systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project.
suitable for foundations
5. Estimate the total amount of grading and filling which will be done:
20,000 cu. yd. grading 12,000 cu. yd. filling
What percent of the site will be so altered? 8
6. What will be the maximum finished slopes? unaltered 30 %
modified 12 %
7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and
after construction?
protect shoreline with hay during construction
B. VEGETATION
1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following
vegetative types:
Woodland 16.3 % Cropland/ 82.6 %
Pasture
Brush or shrubs % Marsh. %
Grass or herbaceous 1.1 % Other
(Sliecify) — --
2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? 0 acres
3. Are there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique
botanical.or biological significance on the site? (See MRpublication
The Uncommon Ones.) X NO YES
it yes, list the species or area and indicate any measures to be used
to reduce potential, adverse impact.
C. FiSH 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 or near the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon X NO YES
Ones.) "-
3. Will the project alter or eliminate wildlife or fish X NO YES
habitat?
4.. If _yes on any of. questions 1-3, list the area, species or habitat, and
indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact on
them.
- 4 -
D. HYDROLOGY
1. Will the project include any of the following:
If yes, describe type of work and mitigative measures
to reduce adverse impacts.
a. Drainage or alteration of any lake, pond, marsh, NO YES
lowland or groundwater supply �X
b. Shore protection works, dams, or dikes X
c. Dredging or. filling operations X
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? 18 %
3. What measures will be taken to reduce the volume of surface water run-
off and/or treat it to reduce pollutants (sediment, oil, gas, etc.)?
contour grading and seeding
4. Will there be encroachment into the regional (100 year) floodplain
by new fill or structures? X NO YES
If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO YES
5. What is the approximate minimum depth to groundwater on --0- feet
the site?
Construction area is substantially above lake level.
E 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? X 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, identify ariv toxic, corrosive or unusual pollutants
in the wastewater.
none
3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed project? X NO YES
If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical composition and method
of disposal.
- 5 -
4. what measures will be used to minimize the volumes or impacts identified
in questions 1-37
not applicable
5. If the project is or includes a landfill, attach information on soil profile,
depth to water table, and proposed depth of disposal.
not applicable
F. AIR QUALITY AND NOISE
1. Will the activity cause the emission of any eases and/or particulates
into the atmosphere? X NO 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.
2. will noise or vibration be generated by construction and/or operation
of the project? NO X YES
If yes, describe the noise source(s); specify decibel levels [d]3(A)J, and
duration (hrs/da) for each and any mitigative measures to reduce the
noise/vibration.
normal residential and subdivision construction noise
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.
no sensitive areas in proximity
G. LAND.RESOURCE CONSERVATION, ENERGY
1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production
or currently in such use? NO _X YES
If yes, specify the acreage involved, type and volume of marketable crop
or wood produced and the quality of the land for such use..
2. Are there any kno:an mineral or ;feat deposits on the site? X NO YES
If yes. ^rify the type of deposit and the acreaue.
3. Will the project result in an increased energy demands NO X YES
Complete the following as applicable:
a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.)
Type
Estimated
Annual
Rea uirement
Peak Demand
Ofourly or Daily)
I
Anticipated Firm Contract or
Supplier Interruptible Basis?
Summer Winter
electric
600,000 KWH
13,600 KW
2;500 KW
NSP
firm contract
residential
gas
8,000 MCF
Minnegasco
firm contract
hotel gas
4,000 MCF
Minnegasco
firm contract
b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed.on-site fuel storage.
5,000 gallon oil storage tank
c. Estimate annual energy distribution for:
space heating
air conditioning 15 %
ventilation 5 %
lighting 20
processing 25
d. Specify any major energy conservation systems and/or equipment
incorporated into this project.
Insulate to meet or exceed Minnesota Energy Code and review site plan
for orientation of structures.
<:. What secondary energy use effects may result from this project
(e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housing or business.es,.etcj-7
We anticipate industrial development in the surrounding area and the
residences and lodging provided here would reduce travel to these sites.
If. OPEN SPACE /RECREATIOJ
1. Are there any designated federal, state, county or local recreation or
open space areas near the site (including wild and scenic rivers, trails,
lake accesses)? X NO _YES
If yes, list areas by nane and explain how each may be affected by the
project. Indicate any measures to be used to reduce adverse impacts.
- 7 -
H. TPANSPORTATION
1. will the project affect any existing or proposed transportation systems
(highway, railroad, water, airport, etc)? VO X YES
If yes, specify which part(s) of the systems) will be affected. For
these, specify existing use and capacities,average traffic speed and
percentage of truck traffic -(if highway);•and indicate how they will be
affected by the project (e.g. congestion, percentage of truck traffic,
safety, increased traffic (ADT), access requirements).
2. iIs mass transit available to the site? bus NO X YES
3. What measures, including transit and paratransit services, are planned to
reduce adverse impacts?
A
nore
J. PLANNING, LAND USE, COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Is the project consistent with local and/or regional comprehensive
plans? NO __YES
If not, explain:
If a zoning change or special use permit is necessary, indicate existing
zoning and change requested.
Existing zoning is R-1A, residential/agricultural and pending
zoning change is P-3, planned unit development.
2. Will the type or height of the project conflict with the character of the
existing neighborhood? X NO YES
If yes, explain and describe any measures to be used to reduce conflicts.
CIR_C
3. How many employees will move into the area to be near the project?
How much new housing will be needed?
.none other than can be housed in project
4. Will the project induce development nearby --either support services
or similar developments? none anticipated
If yesyexplain type of development and specify any other counties and
municipalities affected.
5. Is there sufficient capacity in the following public services to handle
the project and any associated growth?
Amount required
Pub lic Service for_vroiect Sufficient caAact_ty _
water 35,000 gal/da J yes
wastewater treatment 30,000 gal/da yes
sewer 1,500 feet yes
schools. 50 pupils yes
solid waste disposal 25 ton/mo yes
streets .67 miles yes
other (police, fire, etc) normal residential yes
If current major public facilities are not adequate, do existing local
plans call for expansion, or is expansion necessary strictly for this
one project and its associated impacts?
6. Is the project within a proposed or designated Critical Area or part
of a Related Actions EIS.or other environmentally sensitive plan or
program reviewed by the EQC? X NO YES
If yes, specify which area or plan.
7. Will the project involve the use, transportation, storage, release
or d'saosal of--ot-eiit.ially hazardous or toxic liquids, solids on.
gaseous substances such as pesticides, radioactive wastes, poisions,
etc? X NO _YES
If yes, please specify the substance and rate of usage and any measures
to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts from accidents.
- 9 -
8. When the project has served its useful life, will retirement of the
facility require special measures or plans? X NO YES
If yes, specify:
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
night 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.
L.. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
Describe any other major environmental effects which may not have been
identified in the previous sections.
none
III. OTHER MITIGATIVE MEASURES
Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potential
adverse impacts that have not been described before.
This project is a high quality residential development with a green
space and a country inn style hotel. The owner/developer has lived
in the community for twenty-one years and has build and owns a
variety of businesses in Chanhassen.
-lo-
V. FINDINGS
The project is a private ( ) governmental ( .) action. The Responsible Agency
(Person), after consideration of the information in this EAW, and the factors
in Minn. Reg. MEQC 25, makes the following findings.
1. The project is ( ) is not ( } a major action.
State reasons:
2. The project does ( ) does not ( ) have the potential for significant
environmental effects.
State reasons:
3. (For private actions only.) The project is ( ) is not ( ) of more than
local significance.
State Reasons:
TV. 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
either 1 or 2).
7- NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE .
No EIS is needed on this project, because the project is not a
major action and/or does not have the potential for significant
environmental.effects and/or,.for private actions only, the
project is not of more than local significance.
2. EIS PREPARATION NOTICE
An EIS will be prepared on this project because the project is a
major action and'has the potential for significant environmental
effects. For private actions, the project is also of more than
local significance.
a. The tEQC Rules provide that physical construction or operation of the
project must stop when an EIS is required. In special circumstances,
the MEQC cm sYecificallf authorize limited construction to begin or
continue. If you feel there are special circumstances in this
project, specify the extent of progress recommended and the reasons.
b. Date Draft EIS will be submitted:
(month) (day) (year
(MQC 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)):
Signature
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 (refer to question III.J.4 on ?gage 9
- of the EAW). The affidavit need be attached only to the copy of the EAW
which is sent to the EQC.
C. Billing procedures for EQC Monitor Publication
State agency Attach to the EAW sent to the EQC a completed. OSR 100
ONLY: form'(State Register General Order Form --.available at Central
Stores). For instructions, please contact your Agency's
Liaison Officer to the State Register or the Office of the
State Register--(612) 296-8239.
- 12 -