Loading...
Open House Resident CommentsSmithtown Crossing Open House 4 October r , , The Shorewood Planning Commission and City Council held an open house regarding the future redevelopment of the Smithtown Crossing Study Area on 4 October 2011. Residents were invited to submit their comments at the open house meeting, or return the comment sheet to City Hall at a later date. Below please find a tabulation of the comments that were received. Vision Statement "Good statement... great to understand what the idea/strategy should be." Piece -meal vs. Coordinated Redevelopment "Holistic is better. I'd suggest a strong perspective on the "type" of housing which is considered... top choice — single -farm ly, 2" d choice — senior housing, 3` — apartments." "Coordinated preferably." Planning Issues "Can the American Legion be relocated? This would allow additional land without the need of removing existing housing." "Buffering and land use transitions were unclear at the meeting — some charts showed the housing in the buffer zone and some did not. There is not enough property to add senior housing or any multi -level housing." Pedestrian /Bicycle Circulation /Connection "Good idea... the more pedestrian tie -in to the LRT the better!" "Consider role of bike paths to the intersection of 19 /Smithtown and public transportation needs for planned development on the corner." "There is already too much traffic on Smithtown Rd. This redevelopment will make it even worse. It will also increase "turnaround" traffic on Christopher Road which is already a problem. It would necessitate a bike path on Smithtown which residents have opposed." Housing /Land Use (What is needed in Shorewood ?) "I'm opposed to any plan that involves the removal of the single family home located at 24650 Smithtown Road as there needs to be a buffer between residential and commercial /multi- family use." "Do not need senior housing. I do not support a multi -level complex, including a variance to exceed the current height restrictions. I believe this portion of the redevelopment will decrease my property value." ran] M "It's great that the City is taking a holistic view of who we should be and what we should "look" like." "I'm also opposed to the thinning of the wooded area behind my home and that of my neighbors on Christopher Road as this area helps reduce traffic noise from Hwy. 19 and obstructs views of commercial signage." "I support the redevelopment of the Legion properties (the gas station and the existing Legion building). _ do not support a senior housing complex and new retail /business. We should support our existing business! We have enough shops, dry cleaners, hair salons, insurance offices, banks, etc. nearby. We moved to Shorewood for the "woods ". This redevelopment will require more destruction of green space. I do not have confidence that our green space will be protected, similar to the Gideon Glen debacle where too many trees were destroyed in order to preserve the trees." Thank you for providing your constituents and neighbors with the opportunity to provide feedback on the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study. Vision Statement: The Vision Statement seems relatively well thought out, although a bit "idealistic." It is unlikely that any major mixed use development will be pedestrian/bicycle and neighborhood friendly. A commercial development will increase traffic volume in an area that already is NOT pedestrian /bicycle friendly. The shoulders along Smithtown are too narrow to safely use and although the traffic flow at the intersection of 19 and Smithtown is better controlled, it is still a bad intersection for non - vehicular traffic. Additionally, there is no good route of travel to safely get to the LRT to the north on 19, to the east on 19 or to the west on Smithtown. Keeping any proposed development more in line with the residential characteristics of Shorewood would be critical to its acceptance in the community. We don't need a big box retailer, developed by a national developer who will come in to take what they can in the way of municipal subsidies, make lots of promises, follow through on a few, and then sell it to an investor or group looking for a coupon to clip with no interest in how it contributes to or fits in with the community. It's all about the economics, and nothing more for those groups. In regards to landscaping, unless the City requires the planting of trees with 6" or larger trunks, which won't happen, it is unlikely that the landscaping will soften the impact of a larger development on the neighboring residential properties. As an example, of the twigs that were planted in Gideon Glen, some have not made it and those that have certainly have not grown in a manner that will provide adequate screening in most of our lifetimes, if similar landscaping were to be utilized for the proposed Smithtown Crossing Development it would be an injustice to those of us that call this area our home. Piece Meal vs. Coordinated Redevelopment: Overall, a coordinated development makes a lot more sense and, if properly executed, should result in a significantly nicer mix of assets for our community. Planning Issues: Study Area west boundary, under no circumstances, should extend any farther than 24620 Smithtown Road, if that far, The extension ofu mixed use commercial development into predominantly residential neighborhood has the potential to not only adversely affect the values of our homes, but also the characteristics of what has been our neighborhood for the past 2]years. Is there a reason that the site that the City acquired immediately south of City Hall on Country Club Road was not included iothe Study area? It would seem to me that since the City is including virtually all of the other municipally owned property inthe Study Area, that h would he prudent to include that site ui this time aawell. Land uyca should focus on low to moderate density housing in the western most portion of tile Study Area with considerable open and heavily landscaped space buffering the properties immediately to the west. Any commercial dovo|opruund should occur in and be limited to those areas that are immediately contiguous to County Road lg. Buffering and land use transitions will be critical to support from our neighborhood. Perhaps the bulk nf the property located at 24620 Smithtown Road could be used to "buffer" our residential neighborhood from the impact ofu larger mixed use development. Significant landscaping throughout the project vvouid soften the impact of this development on our community. Perhaps there would be a way to route a bike/walking path through this property through Gideon Glen to get a safer route of travel to the LRT access point that is just to the North on County Road 19. Similar care should be taken with the property immediately east nfthe Senior Center ua it abuts oresidential neighborhood. Gideon Glen, when it was acquired was done so to preserve the natural woodlands. It was promptly clear cut and serves ueu drainage pond for the Smithtown Crossing Shopping Center located ioTonku Bay. In short, what was once beautiful woodland ie now decimated. D would bo nice tu preserve whatever natural views of Gideon Glen are left. Quite frankly, l don't see the purpose of including Gideon Glen iothe Redevelopment Study unless there is a plan to also allow a portion of this property to be rezoned and developed. Any competent developer will understand that any development should take advantage of the views of what woods are left and that they should plan to drain their property into the holding pond now located there. Vehicular access to and from County Road 19 should be pushed north of the existing intersection with Smithtown to provide for better ingress and egress from the proposed development. Access fromnthe development onto Smithtown should be kept towards the center of the development so as to limit the traffic impact on the neighborhoods immediately tothe wed. I believe that internal circulation can best be addressed bvthe City's planning staff once there are real development proposals k/ consider. As previously stated it would be nice 1ohave u bike/walking path that would provide better and safer access to the LRT to the north on County Road 19. Contaminated Soils should be and are the responsibility of the Landowner and their tenants. The City should proceed with caution when considering the acquisition of any property with contarninated soils. As a tax payer, I would hate to see the City assume any liability for the costs associated with mitigating a contaminated site. Phasing— In reality, the study are really includes only three potential areas of redevelopment: 1) that area at the northwest corner of the intersection of Smithtown and County Road 19; 2) that area lying on the south side of County Road 19 and north of City Hall and Badger Park; 3) that area north of County Road 19 and South of the Public Works Building. In regards to area #3, there will in all probability be only one phase of development as the parcel is not really large enough for a multi phased development. Area #2 could be a phased development; however, it is a relatively small site that would likely be redeveloped as a small retail strip with one or to pads. My guess is that due to the current economic climate and the costs that would be incurred in acquiring the properties in this area that it will likely be well into the future, despite that fact that it probably offers the most retail potential as a site due to its visibility and direct access to County Road 19. This would be a better site for a moderate sized single tenant retail development as it is bordered on the north by retail and municipal uses, on the south by municipal uses, to the east by municipal uses and to the west by the buffer that is currently used by the Country Club. Area #1 is likely to be a phased development consisting one phase of commercial /institutional use in the area immediately adjacent to County Road 19 and a second phase of low to moderate multi- level housing to the west. Likely there will be different developers for each of these phases, and in all probability, these phases will not be developed simultaneously. Redevelopment of lots on an individual basis makes little sense. Future Development of the Minnetonka Country Club If this is something that is anticipated to occur in the relatively near future, say in the next 3 -10 years, then any redevelopment study should incorporate this property as well, and all residents in Shorewood should be notified, as redevelopment of the Country Club would significantly impact the broader community of Shorewood. Land Use and Zoning of 24250 Smithtown Road — This property appears to be a beautiful residential property that has, over time, become surrounded by commercial, retail and municipal uses. It is an island in an otherwise generally commercial district. Rezoning probably makes sense. Long term, a municipal related use probably makes some sense, although it could probably accommodate a moderate to high density multifamily (rental) development or perhaps an institutional type of user, i.e.... Senior Center, VFW, Library, Community Center, Post Office, etc... Pedestrian Connection from Badger Park to the north side of Smithtown Road — Unless there is a connection to the LRT, what is the purpose of such a connection? Drainage — It is assumed that the bulk of the drainage from the northwest portion of the Study Area will flow into the holding pond in Gideon Glen, and then to the north until it turns back to the east and flows into Lake Minnetonka. I am not as familiar with the drainage flows for the other portions for the Study Area. i • • NOW 1 i .• Housing/Land Use (What is needed in Shorewood ?) If this area is to be redeveloped, a comprehensive plan should result in a better overall development for our community than a parcel by parcel redevelopment. What we don't need is a box retail development; there is a vacant one nearby in Navarre at an intersection with higher traffic counts than those at County Road 19 and Smithtown Road. At the present time, we don't need a lot of strip retail development either. Some senior housing might be nice to add to our community. Service oriented businesses, i.e .... restaurants might be nice. Local ownership/Local Developers would be a big plus. Someone who will take some pride in what they develop because they live here (in the Twin Cities) would be a huge plus. There are plenty of qualified and capable local developers and investors to make something of this scale happen when the economics support it. Other: Potential Height of Potential Developments. Personally, I don't see a big difference between 40' and 45'in height. The most important consideration should be how the project fits into our community and that it is generally architecturally pleasing. Tax Increment Financing: While TIF is a popular tool employed by many municipalities and developers, personally, I believe that unless a developer can put together a development that stands on its own economically, that it shouldn't be built. Why does everything need to be subsidized by us the tax payer? Acquisition of Land by the City. Is the City prepared to utilize its power of eminent domain, if necessary to make this redevelopment happen? Is the acquisition of these properties the best use of the City's limited financial resources? How will the City offset the lost tax revenue from parcels it acquires if it ends up holding them for 3, 5, 10 or 15 years? As previously stated contaminated soils are the responsibility of the current (and former) Landowner's. The City should not get involved in assuming any liability associated with mitigation of contaminated soils. Although the 2" d Draft of the Redevelopment Study appears to suggest that the broader public /community has been involved in the process of developing this study, it was not until September 23` that the City notified area residents of the proposed redevelopment. There have been no meetings with affected neighborhoods, public or otherwise, with the exception of the informal open house meeting that was held on Tuesday, October 4, 2011. It should be noted that several of the City Council Members or Planning Commission Members did not attend this meeting. The 2" d Draft of the Redevelopment Study references "The County Road 19 Corridor Study, adopted in 2003," but attendees at the open house were not, to the best of my knowledge, provided with this document. In general, I believe that a comprehensive redevelopment of many of the properties situated in the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study could be a very positive thing for our community, although I have some concerns about the distance down Smithtown Road that the City is considering extending this district.