12-02-14 Planning Comm Mtg AgendaCITY OF SHOREWOOD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, 2 DECEMBER 2014
CALL TO ORDER
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
18 November 2014
AGENDA
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL / (LIAISON) SCHEDULE
STUDY SESSION
GENG (Nov)
LABADIE (Dec)
MADDY (Jan' I5)
MUEHLBERG (TBD)
DAVIS (Feb' 15)
1. DISCUSS GREENSTEP CITIES PROGRAM - TREE CITY USA
2. CONTINUED DISCUSSION — ZONING: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
4. OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS
5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA
6. REPORTS
Liaison to Council
SLUC
Other
7. ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2014
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Geng called the meeting to order at 7:12 P.M.
ROLL CALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 P.M.
Present: Chair Geng; Commissioners Davis, Labadie, and Maddy; and, Planning Director Nielsen
Absent: Commissioner Muehlberg
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Maddy moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda for November 18, 2014, as presented.
Motion passed 4/0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
October 21, 2014
Maddy moved, Davis seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October
21, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 4/0.
STUDY SESSION
MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB PROPERTY
Director Nielsen noted that the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) property is up for sale. He stated one
developer has indicated they have purchased the property. The meeting packet contains some background
information about the site and the zoning of it that he had assembled for a November 4, 2014, City
Council Executive Session. That information is available on the City's Nvebsite and it Nvill be updated
Nvhen new factual information is available. There Nvill likely be a link on the Nvebsite home page.
Nielsen Nvent through the background material. The highlights are as follows.
The MCC property is the largest single parcel of land in ShoreNvood. It is 116.9 acres in size.
The Comprehensive (Comp) Plan categorizes the proposed land use of the property as semi-
public. That is what a golf course is considered.
The property is zoned R -IA, Single - Family Residential. The first thing a developer Nvill have to
do is submit an application for the City to amend the Comp Plan. That process is a two -stage
process — a pre- application stage and the formal application. During the pre - application stage the
developer Nvill informally come before the Planning Commission and Council and present Nvhat
they are considering, Nvhat the process might look like and Nvhat issues they Neill be faced Nvith
during development. That stage does not involve a public hearing.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
November 18, 2014
Page 2of7
The property Nvill be developed as some sort of Planned Unit Development (PUD). The
underlying density may remain R -IA. Under R -IA zoning, the site could potentially be
subdivided into 100 lots. But, not all of the site is suitable for lots. There is a fair amount of poor
soil (deep peat) on the property. The lots Nvould be clustered on a portion of the site.
He thought the transportation component will dictate what happens on the property.
He spoke about the PUDs in Shorewood.
Boulder Bridge — it basically has R -IA lots and open space and it allowed for multiple boat slips
for almost all of the lots (including lots that do not front Lake Minnetonka).
Marsh Pointe — through the PUD process the site Nvas able to use the R -IA density of one unit per
acre (40,000 square feet). Some smaller lots Nvere allowed as Nvell. Because of the smaller lots the
City obtained various sized setbacks around the Nvetland area. This development Nvas the impetus
for updating the Nvetland ordinance to require setbacks.
Watten Ponds — the site Nvas zoned R -IA and the PUD process allowed some smaller lots (close
to high 20,OOOs square feet) and some lots Nvere larger than one acre. This development Nvas the
impetus for adopting a tree preservation ordinance.
Shorewood Pond — it is a senior housing development and per the City s Ordinance it Nvas
required to be developed as a PUD. It is essentially single - family houses clustered together. The
clusters are four. It is located in essentially what is a single - family district. More units Nvere
constructed because it Nvas senior housing. The main roadwaN- going through the development is
public and the other roadwa -,Ts are private and maintained by the association.
Amesbury — it Nvas the Citv's first PUD. It Nvas developed in the mid to late 1970s. It basically
had one unit per acre density. The City approved increasing the density to two units per acre.
Patio homes (two single - family attached houses sometimes called twin homes) and townhouses
Nvere built. The main roadwa -,T through the site is public and the rest are private. The roadwa -,T Nvas
built to a lesser standard and the structures Nvere built closer to roadways.
Amesbury West — it Nvas an expansion of Amesbury and Nvas developed under the current PUD
Ordinance. Some townhouses Nvere developed.
Barrington — the original zoning allowed a certain density but the City allowed a little higher
density. It alreadv allowed for double homes. The dwellings are two - family rather than single -
familV. Those residents take care of the private roadwa -,T.
The Seasons — it is a senior housing project. The dwellings are all tv n- homes.
Robert S. C. Peterson Addition — it Nvas one of the better uses of the PUD process. The underlying
zoning Nvas R -IA. The zoning for this site did not change. The City allowed some smaller lots
and therefore had some common open space protected. The process Nvas a PUD conditional use
permit (C.U.P.).
Waterford — it is the best example of a PUD district. It is a mixed use development. There are
large lot single - family houses, a strip of twin -homes and then a commercial component along
Highwa -,T 7. As part of the project a new intersection Nvas built at Old Market Road. Nielsen stated
from his perspective, for the commercial component the City chose not to express what it wanted
to see on that property. He thought the commercial component could have been much nicer.
Silver Ridge — it is similar to the Robert S. C. Peterson PUD.
Near Mountain — it is the biggest PUD in Shorewood. For the street that runs along Silver Lake
those abutting lots are 30,000 square feet in size. To the east of that the lot sizes decrease to
10,000 square feet.
He noted the PUD process is a three stage process — the Concept Stage, the Development Stage (it
coincides Nvith preliminary plat) and the Final Plan Stage (it includes the final plat, the development
agreement, getting the letters of credit together and recording what Nvas approved). He stated staff has met
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
November 18, 2014
Page 3of7
Nvith four developers who Nvere interested in Nvhat Nvas possible for the property. Staff informed them that
it Nvould likely be developed as a PUD. He told them it is possible to combine the Concept Stage and
Development Stage but he recommended against doing that.
He also noted that Council has decided to hire a planning consultant to assist people. The scope of that
effort has not been determined. Staff Nvill be intervieNving some consultants the Nveek of November 24.
Hopefully, they Neill appear before Council during Council's December 8 meeting. He stated the Planning
Commission Nvill have a busy next six to twelve months.
Chair Geng asked if it is possible that the Planning Commission Nvill have to meet more than once a
month. Director Nielsen responded it is.
Director Nielsen stated the planning consultant Nvill be asked to manage public information dissemination.
He thought there Nvill be some type of informal open house before the MCC property redevelopment
process advances very far along. Residents Nvill be told that the ovmers of the MCC property have a right
to develop it and use it. The City Nvill solicit feedback about concerns residents have about the
redevelopment. The MCC Golf Course is located in one planning district, the property to the north of it is
another planning district and the property to the east of it is in another planning district. It is likely that
residents living in the three different planning districts will be notified at least for certain aspects the
process.
Nielsen then stated, for example, if all of the lots Nvere to be on one -half of the MCC property the lots Nvill
be smaller. And, the setbacks that go along Nvith that Neill not be R -IA setbacks; they Nvill be
correspondingly smaller. The setbacks Neill be internal to the PUD and therefore Nvon't affect the
surrounding properties. The PUD allows that to happen. It is a negotiated through the PUD process Nvhich
allows for some flexibility in how the lots are created Nvithin the project area.
Nielsen explained developers have been told that because there are plans to extend the SmithtoN -,n Road
sidewallc to the east it would not be unreasonable for the City to expect some type of looped sideNvallc/trail
around the perimeter of the site. One developer he spoke Nvith said that Nvould not be a problem; it Nvould
benefit the project. He stated he thought there is an opportunity for the City to get some things it Nvould
like (e.g., protection of the sensitive parts of the site). He reiterated that transportation Nvill be a real issue.
He stated staff anticipates a traffic study NN 11 be done relative to the project and to help determine how to
mitigate the impact of the increased traffic flow on Country Club Road and Lake Linden Drive. He
commented that if Country Club Road Nvere moved to the Nvest and if it made it a little less convenient for
the drivers that Nvant to cut thru to get to Highway 7 then that reduction in traffic could help mitigate the
impact of the new traffic.
Commissioner Davis asked Nvhere the poor soils are on the property. Director Nielsen responded mostly
on the south end.
Director Nielsen stated that drainage is also a concern for the redeveloped site. He noted the area is Nvell
served Nvith municipal Nvater and sanitary seNver. He stated there are issues Nvith public open space.
Commissioner Maddv asked if staff has formally spoken Nvith the current ovmers of the MCC property.
Director Nielsen responded no.
Director Nielsen noted that the City Ordinance requires that a developer has to have control the property
before they can make an application. They have to at least have a purchase agreement that Nvill last as
long as the process Nvill take. He explained the City already requires escrows to cover the cost of the
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
November 18, 2014
Page 4of7
City's expenditures for processing a request. But, for the size of the MCC project it is not enough.
Therefore, the Shorewood City Attornev Nvill develop a predevelopment agreement to ensure the
developer covers the City ,s cost of processing a request.
Nielsen stated the Near Mountain PUD Nvas 273 units. The Waterford PUD Nvas also larger than Nvhat the
MCC PUD Neill be.
Chair Geng stated he assumes a lot of trees on the MCC property Neill be lost. Director Nielsen stated the
goal of a PUD is to site lots and houses to save as mariv trees as possible. Nielsen noted the trees tend to
be on the better ground in the MCC property.
Director Nielsen commented that he assumes that there Neill be a joint meeting of the Council and
Planning Commission to provide the Commission Nvith direction.
Nielsen stated the City Attorney Nvill draft some guidelines for Council that Nvill also apply to the
Planning Commission about how to communicate Nvith the press and residents. It Nvill lay out Nvhat can be
said and Nvhat should not be said. For the Summit Woods PUD the Attornev eventually advised members
of the Council and Planning Commission to encourage residents to present their questions and concerns at
public meetings about the project so that even-one hears the same thing.
2. DISCUSS GREENSTEP CITIES PROGRAM
Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission last discussed the GreenStep Cities Program during its
August 5, 2014, meeting. During that meeting there Nvas a review of the things the City had done since it
received its first GreenStep aNvard. He also attempted to identify things the Planning Commission can do
in that Program.
He noted that Council Nvill interview consultants to conduct an alternative (green) energy study for the
City. One of them Nvill be selected to do the study and present to Council Nvhat the City could potentially
do from a cost effective perspective. He clarified he is not sure what involvement the Planning
Commission Nvill have Nvith that.
He explained the City Ordinance addresses solar energy quite Nvell. It does not address Nvind energy as
Nvell. He recommended Staff and the Planning Commission come up with an ordinance to address Nvind
generators. There have been a few inquiries into individual residential Nvind generators. Consultants have
indicated that is not very cost effective for this area. Some cities have adopted ordinances that regulate
Nvind generators.
He stated during the August 5 meeting it Nvas noted that there may be other Best Practices (BPs) under
Urban Forests section in the GreenStep Cities Program that the City has or could easily implement to
qualify as Tree City USA. The City used to be qualified as such. He does not think it takes a lot of effort
to be in it. He explained BP 16.2 talks about adopting as policy Minnesota Tree Trusts' BPs and using the
guidelines in at least one development project, such as the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC)
redevelopment, to get the City more credit on its GreenStep Cities Program. That could be discussed
during the December 2 Planning Commission meeting.
He noted that BP Local Air Quality 23.2 can be marked as done because the City already regulates
recreational burning and outdoor Nvood boilers.
He stated that during the August 5 meeting Commissioner Davis stated the City should be able to get
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
November 18, 2014
Page 5of7
credit for backyard gardening and chickens; BP Local Food 27.4.b.
He then stated the Planning Commission's greatest efforts regarding the GreenStep Cities Program over
the next few months Nvill be related to trees and alternative energy.
In response to a question from Chair Geng, Director Nielsen stated the alternative energy study Nvill take
six to eight months.
Director Nielsen explained that very early this Near he and Mayor Zerby met Nvith representatives from a
company who Nvanted to put in a solar array at Badger Park. The company Nvould put in the infrastructure
at no cost. It Nvould guarantee that the Citv's electrical rates would not increase more than a small amount
for a number of Nears. The structure Nvould generate power for certain parts of the City Hall Campus. A
representative made a presentation to Council. The firm Nvould have been eligible for tax incentives for
doing that if it Nvould move fonvard quickly. Some members of Council did not Nvant to move fonvard
Nvith that offer quickly. That is where the impetus for the study came from.
Chair Geng asked if the consultant Nvould address Nvind energy. He suggested having the Planning
Commission's consideration of Nvind energy dovetail Nvith that.
Director Nielsen suggested asking the consultant what their perspective is about Nvind energy for a single
residential lot.
Chair Geng stated being proactive on Nvind energy Neill hopefully keep the City out of the situation that
the City of Orono is in Nvith one of its property owners. He asked if there is a sense of urgency in
amending the Ordinance to address Nvind energy Nvith regard to the GreenStep Cities Program. Director
Nielsen stated it Nvould not get the City a step by regulating Nvind energy.
Director Nielsen suggested the Planning Commission Nvait on Nvind energy and give the consultant some
direction to provide insight on the effectiveness of single residential lot Nvind energy. Geng clarified
Council may not Nvant the consultant to focus on that. Nielsen recommended the Commission suggest to
Council that it Nvould like the consultant to provide insight on small lot Nvind energy. Commissioner
Maddv stated it is clear the economics are not there for that which is whN- there is no push for it at this
time.
3. DISCUSS REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY RECYCLING
Director Nielsen clarified that one member of Council asked that the Planning Commission discuss the
requirements for commercial property recycling and multi - family dwelling unit recycling.
He explained that the City already has recycling for single - family residents. It does not require
commercial and multi - family properties to recycle. Some cities do have ordinances that require that. If the
Citv Nvere to move fonvard Nvith such an ordinance it Nvould be modeled after some other citv's ordinance.
Most of those ordinances are one page long. Staff found out that starting in 2016 the State of Minnesota is
going to mandate that. He asked the Commission if it Nvants to take this up in the near future or Nvait until
a mandate goes into effect. He stated if there Nvould be push back when the mandate goes into effect then
the City can use the mandate as an out. If the City implements that requirement up front the City has to
defend against any push back. He noted he is not sure whN- the City does not have commercial reeveling.
It Nvould make sense to do that. He stated when the City moves fonvard Nvith that it has to make sure it
recycles in its parks. Currently any recycling done there is handled by the Recycling Coordinator.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
November 18, 2014
Page 6of7
He noted that commercial recycling should earn the City some steps on the GreenStep Cities Program.
Nielsen also noted that he and Chair Geng talked about the timing of implementing that. Nielsen stated
Geng had suggested that if the City implements commercial recycling in advance of the mandate that it
have an informal gathering of commercial businesses to talk about it and to find out which are alreadv
reeveling.
Commissioner Maddv asked if staff has anv idea of how many commercial properties are recycling now.
Director Nielsen responded he does not know. Maddy stated he does not think there Nvill be much push
back.
Maddv stated that being proactive could potentially streamline the logistics and reduce the cost. He noted
that the Citv has only one residential cycler.
Director Nielsen stated he likes Chair Geng's idea of having some type of forum for commercial
businesses and multi - family unit developments to talk about the inevitable recycling mandate. He
suggested doing that in Februarv.
Chair Geng stated he thinks people like to be asked about their perspectives.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There Nvere no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS
6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA
Director Nielsen stated for the Planning Commission's December 2, 2014, meeting there Nvill be
discussion about the tree ordinances he referred to during the discussion about the GreenStep Cities
Program. He noted the State has developed a model solar energy ordinance. He stated he Nvill provide the
Commission Nvith a copy of that, but it may be more effective to discuss that after the alternative energy
study is started. The meeting Neill likely be a study session.
Nielsen encouraged the Commissioners to keep the third Tuesday of the month open in case there is a
need to meet more frequently because of the Minnetonka Country Club property redevelopment.
7. REPORTS
Liaison to Council
Chair Geng reported on the October 27, 2014, and the November 10, 2014, City Council meetings (as
detailed in the minutes of those meetings).
Director Nielsen explained that during its October 27 meeting Council took action on the proposed
amendment to the City Zoning Code relative to senior housing. People thought the amendment Nvas
approved on a 2/1 vote only to learn later that a majority- of Council, not just members present, had to
approve it so it did not pass. That Neill likely be considered again during Council's December 8 meeting
and he hopes it is adopted. (The discussion about concerns about amending the Code to specifically
address senior housing on the SmithtoN -,n Crossing Redevelopment Area is documented in the October 27
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
November 18, 2014
Page 7of7
meeting minutes.) He noted that Rick Fenske, Nvith WEIS Builders, made a presentation about senior
housing to Council during its September 8 Nvork session.
Nielsen reiterated whN- he thought senior housing / life cycle housing Nvas appropriate for Shorewood in
general.
Commissioner Davis stated the Sioux community is now building various types of life cycle housing in
its new developments. She then stated she thought there Nvill be more focus on the SmithtoN -,n Crossing
Redevelopment Area because of the redevelopment of the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) property.
Director Nielsen concurred.
Director Nielsen stated that maybe the senior component of the SmithtoN -,n Crossing redevelopment could
be moved across the street where there is a little more room and it Nvould not be close to the residential
neighborhood in that area.
There Nvas discussion about concerns conveyed during the November 10 meeting by residents' about the
new Boulder Cover development in the City of Chanhassen. The concerns Nvere primarily about safety
and drainage.
There Nvas discussion about the future reconstruction of Strawberry Lane and the construction of a trail
along side. [During its November 10 Nvork session Council agreed to discuss those items further and the
funding for them during the February 2014 council and staff retreat.]
SLUC
Other
8. ADJOURNMENT
Maddy moved, Davis seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of November 18,
2014, at 8:38 P.M. Motion passed 4/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
i, --I
Why your city should become a
Tree City USA Community
The Tree City USA program provides direction, assistance, and national recognition
TREE CITY USA to your community by supporting the framework for a sustainable urban forest.
I
J
• Reduce COStS for energy, storm water man-
agement, and erosion control. Trees yield up to three
times their cost in overall benefits to the city, averag-
ing $273 per tree,
• Cut energy consumption by up to
25 %. Studies indicate that as few as three additional
trees planted around each building in the United
States could save our country $2 billion, annually, in
energy costs.
• Build Stronger ties to your neighbor-
hood and community. Trees and green spaces directly
correlate to greater connections to the neighborhood
and neighbors.
• Honor your community and demon-
strate your commitment to a healthier environment
through Arbor Day celebrations and Tree City USA
recognition.
• Boost property values across your Learn More: www.arborday.org(freeCity
community. Properly placed trees can increase (888)448 -7337
property values from 7 -21% and buildings in wooded E -mail: TreeCity@arborday.org
areas rent more quic1dy and tenants stay longer.
(3AXbor Da Foundation"
-Z- Z; A
If
', m�
•;mil .Y
1'
44
_
Benefits of Being a Tree City
Tree City
USA
Is Your Community
a Tree City USA?
Benefits of Being
a Tree City USA
Become a Tree City
USA
Strengthen Your
Tree City USA
Start Your Online
Application
State Urban
Forestry
Coordinators
Receive the
Building Greener
Communities
e -news
we inspire people to plant,
nurture and celebrate trees
Page 1 of 3
Benefits of the Tree City USA Program
Small towns, boroughs and townships, big cities, villages and military
installations have seen the benefits of participation in the Tree City USA
program. Whether it's creating a foundation for tree care or expanding an
innovative community tree program or project, the benefits are numerous:
http:// www. arborday. org/ programs /treecityusa/benefits.cfm 11/25/2014
Benefits of Being a Tree City
Download Our Benefits Flyer
f
Framework for Action
Page 2 of 3
The four core standards for becoming a Tree City USA provide the framework and
direction for the strategic management of community trees. Many communities use
Tree City USA standards as a way to begin caring for the urban forest. Others
regularly enhance their management through improved ordinances, innovative
programs and increased emphasis on planting and tree care.
Education
Annual participation as a Tree City USA community provides the opportunity to
educate people who care about their community about the value of tree resources,
the importance of sustainable tree management and engage individuals and
organizations in advancing tree planting and care across the urban forest. Tree
City USA status can create a strong working relationship with your state forestry
agency and other conservation groups.
Public Image and Community Pride
Participation in the Tree City USA program helps residents feel good about the
place they live and work. Annual recognition shows visitors and prospective
residents that trees, conservation and the environment are an important part of life
in the community.
Pride in public trees also leads to more engaged residents and better care for new
and existing trees on private property.
Publicity
Tree City USA participation presents an opportunity to educate the public about
your community's urban forestry program and showcase the benefits of community
trees. Recognition can also generate interest from other organizations and
http: / /www.arbor day. org / programs /treecityusa/benefits.cfm 11/25/2014
Benefits of Being a Tree City
communities that aren't yet managing their trees as well as they might. As one
forester put it, "This is advertising that money can't buy — and it is free!"
Tree boards, parks departments, public works officials and volunteers, alike, are
recognized for the valuable work they provide to the community through
sustainable tree management. Many communities share in their Tree City USA
recognition across city departments, elected officials, volunteers, students and
business leaders.
1- 888 -448 -7337 1 Donate Now I Privacy I About Us I Site Map I Careers I Your State I Blog
Page 3 of 3
http: / /www.arborday.org/ programs /treecityusa/benefits.cfm 11/25/2014
Tree City USA Standards
Tree City
USA
Is Your Community
a Tree City USA?
Benefits of Being a
Tree City USA
Become a Tree City
USA
Strengthen Your
Tree City USA
Start Your Online
Application
State Urban
Forestry
Coordinators
Receive the
Building Greener
Communities
e -news
we inspire people to plant,
nurture and celebrate trees
Tree City USA Standards
To qualify as a Tree City USA community, a town or city must
meet four standards established by the Arbor Day Foundation
and the National Association of State Foresters.
These standards were established to ensure that every qualifying
community* would have a viable tree management program.
Page 1 of 2
http: / /www.arborday.org/ programs /treeCityUSA /standards.cfm 11/25/2014
Tree City USA Standards
They were also designed so that no community would be
excluded because of size.
The Four Standards for Tree City USA Recognition
1. A Tree Board or Department
2. A Tree Care Ordinance
3. A Community Forestry Program With an Annual Budget of at Least $2 Per Capita
4. An Arbor Day Observance and Proclamation
Page 2 of 2
Need help meeting the four standards? The urban and community forestry coordinator in your state
forester's office will be happy to work with communities in taking these first steps toward better
community forestry.
Request a Tree City USA application
TREE CITY USA'
1- 888448 -7337 1 Donate Now
Tree City USA is an Arbor Day Foundation program in cooperation with:
�f?nC4 CisTq
Privacy I About Us I Site Map I Careers I Your State I Blog
http: / /www.arborday.org/ programs /treeCityUSA /standards.cfm 11/25/2014