HomeMy WebLinkAboutHomestead EAW Response November 23, 2016
City of Lake Elmo
Planning and Zoning Department
Stephen Wensman, Planning Director
3800 Laverne Avenue North
Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042
Dear Mr.Wensman:
On behalf of The Homestead Homeowner's Association, I would like to submit the following comments
related to the EAW for the proposed Royal Golf Residential Development project:
1) The list of Permits and Approvals Required on Page 5 indicates that a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council. We believe this is inaccurate
since the City Council has not voted to amend its current Comprehensive Plan to allow any kind
of residential development on this property.
2) The Traffic Impact Analysis was based on data collected in July, 2016. We are concerned that
this data may significantly under-represent the normal "baseline"traffic volume for the
following reasons:
• A significant portion of Lake Elmo Avenue N was closed during this time due to construction
on Lake Elmo Ave and in the Old Village area.
• Local schools were not in session due to the Summer break.
• The Tartan Park golf course was not operational during this time.The developer has
indicated that they expect 30,000—45,000 rounds of golf annually which will generate
additional traffic volume that may not have been fully reflected in the analysis.
3) We've heard recently that the City Council might opt to schedule a vote on a proposed
Comprehensive Plan amendment for this land at the upcoming December 6`h Council meeting.
We feel that a vote on December 6`h would not allow enough time for a thorough review and
consideration of the public comments related to this EAW. Our understanding is that It is
common practice by RGU's to not take any legislative action on their comprehensive plan
amendments for the area under consideration prior to the completion and public review of an
EAW or EIS and official action on the pending EAW or EIS.
4) We would like to raise the question of whether an EIS might be required or simply be prudent
for this development.As you undoubtedly know, MN Rule 4410.4400 Subp.14 defines a set of
residential housing unit thresholds which trigger the need for a mandatory EIS based on "the
total number of units that the proposer may ultimately develop on all contiguous land owned by
the proposer or for which the proposer has an option to purchase." Unless the developer is
willing to put the golf course acreage into a conservation easement in perpetuity,the total
number of housing units which could eventually be built on this entire 477-acre parcel may very
well eventually exceed the thresholds defined in this rule. Our understanding is that a
development with the potential for"400 unattached units or 600 attached units ... if the project
is not consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan" would require a mandatory EIS.
Although our neighborhood continues to be amenable to this proposed development in concept,we
remain disappointed with the proposed 292-unit housing density and we have concerns about the
potential for several hundred additional homes should the golf course someday become financially
unsustainable. Given the unique location and exceptional attributes of this property,coupled with the
widely held local desire to preserve and protect the rural character of Lake Elmo,we feel that 'Open
Space" housing densities similar to those in our neighborhood would be far preferable and more
appropriate for this development.
Thank you for your continued leadership in managing this important process on behalf of our City.
Kindly
Dan Rice, Pre ent
Homestead Homeowners Association
11364 14`h St N
Lake Elmo, MN 55042