The URL can be used to link to this page

12-01-15 Planning Comm Mtg AgendaCITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 1 DECEMBER 2015 A"P'MTI A CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES 17 November 2015 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL / (LIAISON) SCHEDULE BEAN (Dec) JOHNSON (Jan) DAVIS (Nov) GENG (Sep) MADDY (Oct) 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING — REVISED CONCEPT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANS — MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB P.U.D. Applicant: Mattamy Homes Location: 24575 Smithtown Road 2. MINOR SUBDIVISION/COMBINATION (LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT) Applicant: Sass Investments I, LLC Location: 6035 Galpin Lake Road, 22690 and 22740 Murray Street 3. MINOR SUBDIVISION/COMBINATION (LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT) Applicant: Al and Jennifer Larson Location: 21125 and 21195 Radisson Road 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 5. OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS 6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA 7. REPORTS Liaison to Council SLUC • Other 8. ADJOURNMENT [Type text] CITY OF SHOREWOOD  5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 952-960-7900  Fax: 952-474-0128 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 24 November 2015 RE: Minnetonka Country Club – P.U.D. Development Stage Plan and Revised Concept Plan FILE NO. 405 (15.20) BACKGROUND In October of this year, the City adopted a resolution (No. 15-073) approving a Concept Plan for Mattamy Homes to redevelop the Minnetonka Country Club property as a residential Planned Unit Development, consisting of up to 140 single-family homes. The project consists of traditional single-family residential and age-targeted single-family residential. The developer has now submitted an application for the second stage of the review process – Development Stage. During the initial review process, the developer was approached by an adjoining property owner (Venero) on the west side of the site to purchase the back portion of his property for inclusion into the Mattamy project. This coupled with the loss of one age- targeted unit due to tree preservation, brings the total number of units for the project to 142, 39 age- targeted units and 103 traditional homes. Consequently, the current application includes a request for a revision to the original Concept Plan. A public hearing is scheduled for the 1 December 2015 Planning Commission meeting. Various issues associated with the Development Stage plans will be addressed in three separate reports. Planning issues are addressed herein. A memorandum from Northwest Associated Consultants (NAC) addresses natural resource and trail issues and a letter from the City Engineer addresses engineering (transportation and utilities) issues. Spoiler alert: due to the size and complexity of the project and issues that remain to be resolved, staff is recommending that the 1 December public hearing be continued to the January 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Memorandum Re: Minnetonka Country Club P.U.D. – Development Stage Plans 24 November 2015 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS Natural Resources. A. As mentioned, the memorandum from NAC addresses wetland protection, tree preservation and landscaping and treatment of the open space portions of the site. Issues worth highlighting here are as follow: 1. Public Open Space. In the Concept stage of the process, it was recommended that the public open space areas would be natural and low-maintenance. Aside from minimal mowing abutting the trail that winds through those spaces, the space would be similar in character to the Gideon Glen conservation open space on County Road 19. The developer has chosen to include two small areas along the west side of the proposed trail that would have maintained turf (see page two of the Preliminary Landscape Plan). If the City is agreeable to this design, the development agreement for the P.U.D. should include provisions for the homeowners association for the project to be responsible for maintenance/mowing of those areas. 2. Tree Preservation and Landscaping. Part of the developer’s plan for tree replacement includes planting of “street trees” along all streets in the development. These are trees that are planted in the boulevard areas of the public right-of-way. While staff is in agreement that the overall effect of the design can be quite desirable, we are concerned about adding the potential liability of new trees in the public R.O.W. In response, the developer agrees to having provisions included in the development agreement, stating that the homeowners association will be responsible for maintenance of street trees. The City Attorney has advised us that this type of provision would be appropriate. 3. Renewable Energy Resource Opportunities. One issue not addressed in the NAC report, but flagged early on in the review process, is the identification of renewable energy resource opportunities. The City has contracted with an energy consultant - Great Plains Institute - for the “Shorewood Renewable Energy Analysis” which sets forth recommendations relative to alternative energy possibilities in Shorewood. The analysis somewhat downplays the use of wind generators, recognizing potential nuisance aspects and limited energy capture. Solar power, however, appears to warrant some consideration. The Great Plains report makes several recommendations as to how Shorewood’s development regulations might be amended to address solar energy. Those most pertinent to the MCC project are as follow: a. Solar gardens. The Great Plains report states: “There may be opportunity for a moderately sized solar garden within the golf course, but until the site is finalized and the city retains ownership of the wetland area, it cannot be determined how much solar is available at this time. Other considerations will include complications associated with building on or near a wetland and the proximity of utility infrastructure with adequate capacity to interconnect with such a solar development.” -2- Memorandum Re: Minnetonka Country Club P.U.D. – Development Stage Plans 24 November 2015 While this recommendation may have merit, it requires further study. The City will have to determine whether such a use fits in the natural open space areas to be acquired. Questions as to who builds, who owns, and who maintains the installation must be answered. In previous discussions of solar gardens, the issue of security was also raised. These questions need not be resolved at this time. What is known is that the land will be public and available should the City decide to pursue that as an option. The City may wish to have Great Plains do a more detailed analysis of the site, based on the plans currently presented. b. Zoning Issues. Following are possible zoning provisions that could be incorporated into the development agreement for the P.U.D. (1) The developer agreed early on to not include provisions in the declaration of protective covenants for the project that would preclude either roof-mounted or ground-mounted solar installations within the development. (2) Specifically add solar equipment as allowable accessory uses in the development. (3) Allow solar equipment to extend 3-4 feet above the peak of the roofs, either by right, or through a conditional use process. This one deserves close scrutiny from the standpoint of need and aesthetics. Prior to the next Planning Commission meeting, staff will attempt to find actual photos of such installations. (4) Allow solar equipment to encroach into required setbacks. It is important to recognize the importance of structure setbacks in maintaining open space character. Having said that, our codes do allow certain encroachments. Certain features – roof eaves, chimney chases, etc. - are allowed to encroach two feet into required setbacks. This same exception could be considered for solar equipment. The setback requirement for swimming pools in rear yards is 60 percent of the required rear yard setback. This could also apply to solar installations. (5) Accessory structures are currently limited to 15 feet in height. The Great Plains report suggests going to 20 feet for ground-mounted solar equipment. Since accessory buildings may actually exceed 15 feet, due to the measurement being taken from grade to the mid-point between the eave and the peak, 20 feet for solar equipment may be in order. (6) The report suggests the possibility of hardcover exemptions for solar equipment. -3- Memorandum Re: Minnetonka Country Club P.U.D. – Development Stage Plans 24 November 2015 (7) The report suggests the use of “solar easements” that would preclude one homeowner from preventing solar access on his neighbor’s property. This becomes a matter of balancing conflicting interests. Just as the creation of ponding areas or wetland mitigation conflicts with tree cover, solar access can affect the ability to plant or even preserve trees. Further philosophical and legal discussion is required. The City has in the past used P.U.D. as a spring board for eventual amendments to zoning regulations that become applicable to all property in Shorewood. For example, tree preservation requirements and wetland buffer requirements are the result of earlier P.U.D. developments. This can also be the case for the MCC project. Alternative energy provisions from the development agreement can be amended into the current zoning regulations to apply throughout the city. The project actually provides a good case study for determining which changes to adopt. Land Use. B. 1. Concept Plan Revision. As mentioned earlier in this report, an adjoining property owner (Venero) approached the developer about buying the rear portion of his property on Seamans Drive and incorporating the land into the MCC development. This necessitates a revision to the approved Concept Plan that results in a net increase of two lots. The City Attorney has advised that “….this parcel addition is not a material modification to the concept plan approved. The development stage plan application is in substantial conformity to the plan approved.” Not enough is known as of this writing as to how this proposal leaves the remainder of the Venero property. Assuming the result is consistent with the R-1A zoning of that property, it is recommended that the proposed conveyance be processed as a minor subdivision. Depending on the availability of survey information, this could be scheduled as early as the January Planning Commission meeting. 2. Residential Mix. The entire MCC project is planned for single-family residential use on lots ranging in size from 7200 square feet in area, to 43,776 square feet. The developer includes 39 age-targeted units, down one from the Concept Plan, and 103 traditional homes, for a total of 142 homes, assuming the City agrees to the Venero revision. The remainder of the site, aside from street right-of-way, consists of public and private open spaces. The preliminary plat for the project includes several outlots, the uses of which are as follow:  Outlot A – mostly wetland; owned and maintained by the homeowners association (HOA)  Outlot B and C – west entry monuments and wetland; owned and maintained by the HOA  Outlot D – “orphaned open space”; owned and maintained by the HOA  Outlot E – east entry monument; owned and maintained by the HOA -4- Memorandum Re: Minnetonka Country Club P.U.D. – Development Stage Plans 24 November 2015  Outlot F – public open space, including trail; owned and maintained by the City, except for one of the east entry monuments and ponds* which will be maintained by the HOA  Outlot G – preserved woodlot; owned and maintained by the City  Outlot H – public open space, storm water ponds, wetland mitigation area and trail; owned and maintained by the City, except for the ponds*, which will be maintained by the HOA  Outlot I – “orphaned open space”; owned and maintained by the HOA *The City Engineer will prepare a plan for the short- and long-term maintenance of the storm water ponds. 3. Zoning Standards. a. Building Setbacks. The Concept Plan recommended using R-1C zoning district standards as the basis for the traditional home lots. As shown on the Preliminary Site & Utility Plans (sheets 8 and 9 of the plan set), several areas propose 30-foot front yard setbacks instead of 35 feet. This is mitigated by the extraordinary right-of-way widths that are proposed to accommodate street trees and sidewalks. A 30-foot setback with a 60-foot right-of-way versus a 35-foot setback on a 50-foot right-of- way has the same net effect with respect to visual, open space impact. Similarly, the 20-foot front setback for the westerly age-targeted units (east side of street) on a 60-foot right-of-way has the same visual effect as a 25-foot setback on a 50-foot right-of way. There was considerable discussion in the Concept Plan review about the side-yard setbacks proposed for the age-targeted units, particularly for the westerly units. The developer has indicated that he will illustrate how the proximity of the homes can be mitigated with landscaping and by virtue of the curving streets. Some thought should also be given to staggering setbacks on the westerly entry street to avoid a “row house” appearance. There is one exception to the above analysis. Lot 17, Block 10 (see sheet 9) has a 30-foot setback on a 50-foot right-of-way. It appears that this is done in an attempt to save trees at the back of that lot. If this is the case, some provision needs to be made for the long-term protection of those trees. The varying setbacks should be addressed in the development agreement (which becomes the zoning for the site), both by list and by illustration. b. Impervious Surface Restriction. Ordinarily, the required “hardcover” maximum for non-shoreland lots is 33 percent. It is reasonable to allow some additional hardcover per lot, due to the extraordinary amount of open space being set aside on this project. Based on the amount of open space in the project, a standard of 40 percent maximum hardcover is suggested. -5- Memorandum Re: Minnetonka Country Club P.U.D. – Development Stage Plans 24 November 2015 c. The development agreement should include provisions describing how the private open space areas may be used. For example, will any type of structures be allowed in those areas? It will also prescribe how the areas are to be maintained in a natural open space design, consistent with the NAC recommendations. These should be incorporated into conservation easements dedicated to the City. Transportation. C. Several issues were raised relative to transportation in the Concept Stage review: 1. An ad hoc traffic committee has begun work on a study of the Country Club Road, Yellowstone Trail and Lake Linden Drive collector route. Its recommendations will be provided in a separate report to the City Council. 2. In addition to some of the additional right-of-way widths within the project, the developer has provided, as requested, additional right-of-way to bring the portions of Smithtown Road and Country Club Road abutting the site to a full 66-foot width. 3. The preliminary plat includes a second, westerly, access to Smithtown Road. Since this necessitates some alteration of the wetland located in the northwest corner of the site, the developer and City will work with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on a plan for wetland mitigation. 4. The easterly entrance to the project has been shifted over so as to address the issue of headlights aimed at properties on the north side of the street. The street now aligns with a property line on the north side so that headlights pointing north will not be pointed at the home on that side of the street. 5. Specific design standards for the streets in the plat will be addressed in the City Engineer’s report. 6. The NAC report makes recommendations relative to the proposed trail and sidewalk system included in the development. The City Engineer should address design and construction standards for these facilities. You will note that the trail that parallels Country Club Road stops at the intersection of Mary Lake Trail. This is due to the location of a wetland just south of that and the lack of public right-of-way south of that. One of the suggestions made in the Concept Plan review is that Country Club Road could be made more curvilinear as a traffic calming measure. If, in the future, that concept is implemented, consideration should be given to shifting the street slightly to the east, providing a more level area for the trail to be extended down to Yellowstone Trail. The plans do not indicate where potential trail crossings should be located on Country Club Road. This is for the City to determine. Aside from the Mary Lake Trail location, a crossing -6- Memorandum Re: Minnetonka Country Club P.U.D. – Development Stage Plans 24 November 2015 at the Echo Road intersection appears to be logical, assuming safe geometrics in that location. In the future, the City may wish to extend a small segment of sidewalk between Echo Road and Badger Park. Community Facilities. D. Public utilities have been addressed in the City Engineer’s report. One issue in that regard that remains somewhat unresolved is storm drainage. Although the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was contacted early on in the development review process, some confusion apparently exists as to the exact standards for the project. The developer’s engineer and the District continue working to resolve the drainage plans for the project. Watershed representatives indicate that storm drainage should not substantially alter the overall design of the plat. Since this is one of the most significant issues associated with the development, staff recommends that the Development Stage plan review be continued to the first meeting in January. The project is proposed to be developed in three phases as illustrated in the Phasing Plan. Park dedication fees, local sanitary sewer access charges and water connection charges are paid at each stage of platting. With respect to phasing, it is recommended that the trail and landscaping work on the open space areas be commenced in the first phase. It is not unusual for the proposed turf establishment to take 3-5 years to become established. RECOMMENDATION As mentioned at the beginning of this report, staff recommends that the public hearing on the Development Stage plans be continued to the 5 January 2016 Planning Commission meeting. This should allow enough time to address the various issues raised by staff and to obtain Watershed District approvals. Cc: Bill Joynes Paul Hornby Larry Brown Tim Keane Rick Packer -7- NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners @nacplanning.com AI • ' � TO: Brad Nielsen FROM: Michelle Barness DATE: November 24, 2015 RE: Shorewood — Minnetonka Country Club — Development Review FILE: 227.02 BACKGROUND Mattamy Homes has purchased the Minnetonka Country Club and would like to develop the site for single family residential use. The developer will cluster the parcels on the site, leaving approximately 43% of the site in open space. The following review addresses components of the development design pertaining to open space, natural resources, sidewalks and trails, and tree preservation and replacement. Attachments: Exhibit A: Preliminary Landscape Plan and Details Exhibit B: Environmental Analysis — MN Land Cover Classification Exhibit C: Environmental Analysis — Metro Mosquito Control District Wetlands Exhibit D: MCWD Wetland Buffer Study Extract Exhibit E: Eco — Turf Recommendations Exhibit F: Sidewalk Circulation Recommendations Exhibit G: Trail Circulation Recommendations ISSUES AND ANALYSIS Natural Resources. The development proposal is to cluster single family residential parcels on higher areas of the site, while protecting lower areas of the site with poor building soils for open space use and natural resource protection. Trails, water treatment, wetland restoration and habitat are intended to be incorporated within open space areas. A brief analysis of natural conditions on the site demonstrates that little native ecosystem remains today. The pre - settlement vegetation in the area is identified by the MnDNR as Big Woods, consisting of a combination of hardwood tree species. Nonetheless, the existing site does host a variety of natural areas and maintained green spaces which benefit the community by providing passive park space and serving ecological function (wildlife habitat, stormwater treatment, etc.). Exhibit B - Environmental Analysis - MN Land Cover Classification demonstrates that the site consists of a combination of non - native deciduous forest, grassy areas with scattered trees, and built areas. Further, there are several wetlands on the site, the most significant being the sedge meadow / seasonally flooded forest in the northwest corner and several small open water wetlands to the east (see Exhibit C - Environmental Analysis - Metro Mosquito Control District Wetlands). The development design generally attempts to preserve tree stands where construction of roads and lots is not occurring. This includes areas around the perimeter of the site and scattered tree cover in Outlot G to the south. The most significant impact to natural resources on the site appears to be the disturbance of the largely contiguous seasonally flooded forest in the northwest portion of the site, including disturbance of an identified wetland near the intersection of Ayrshire Lane and Smithtown Road. The decision to disturb the wetland in this area, and mitigate it by creating a new wetland elsewhere on the site, was arrived at in discussions between the City and Mattamy Homes. The second access at the end of Ayrshire Lane is intended to resolve the issue of that road being an excessively long cul -de -sac. Further, the City wishes to encourage project traffic to use Smithtown Road / County Road 19 rather than Country Club Road / Yellowstone Trail. Open Space Design and Restoration. The implementation of the proposed open space design will require the protection or conversion of existing land covers on the site, which include a combination of overgrown golf course lawns, unkempt wetland edges, small ponds, sand traps, and scattered areas of shrubs and trees. The developer will need to address how current open space areas will transition in the course of implementing the proposed open space plan. In particular, the developer shall address the following key issues via a narrative, revised plans, or additional information submittals as needed: Wetland Buffer Areas. The City requires a minimum 35 foot natural buffer adjacent to wetlands with new development. Further, a minimum 15 foot building setback must be maintained from the natural buffer area. However, the Minnehaha Watershed District also has requirements for wetland buffers based on the classification of individual wetlands. In discussion with the Watershed District, the developer and the City regarding what minimum wetland buffer standard should be applied, it was decided that the Watershed's minimum requirement would prevail. To be clear, the Watershed District's minimum wetland buffer requirement may be less than the City's in the case of specific wetland classifications on the site, particularly once wetland buffer averaging is applied. As the Watershed District is responsible for conducting a review of the project against its own standards, the City should defer to the Watershed District in the buffer review, but make development approval contingent on receiving the Watershed's approval for these and other wetland related issues. The 35 foot wetland buffer requirement is a minimum City standard imposed with the goal of preserving the function and appearance of protected wetland areas. The site is large and provides ample opportunities for building on the minimum requirement to create a larger conservation area. This is a goal expressed by the City and the developer alike. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District engaged Emmons and Olivier Resources to complete a 01 wetland buffer study that suggests an increase in wetland buffer width to 50 ft. can provide increasing ecological benefits with regards to sediment and nutrient trapping (e.g. nitrogen and phosphorous) and stormwater treatment, and an increase of buffer width to 100 ft. can provide better wildlife habitat and corridor protection (see Exhibit D - MCWD Wetland Buffer Study Extract). The current landscape plan already provides "native buffer seeding" regularly in excess of 35 ft., and there are opportunities to expand this further. Based on the watershed district's analysis it is recommended that the developer take a second look at available open space (with the understanding that additional wetland buffer expansion into parcels is not recommended or required), to identify locations where "native buffer seeding" can be increased to 50 ft. in width to improve sediment and nutrient trapping, or 100 ft. in width to provide more substantial wildlife habitat. A survey monument is required at each lot line where it crosses a wetland buffer strip and as necessary to adequately determine the location of the wetland buffer strip. These monuments shall remain in place after site grading of the lot has been completed. The developer shall verify that wetland buffer monuments will be provided. Open Space Planting Specifications. A wetland buffer is a general descriptor for the creation of a naturalized area around wetlands that can serve the ecological functions described. However, a wetland buffer is not necessarily a single planting type, but may be quite diverse based on local environmental conditions (e.g. soil type, sun conditions, topography, etc.). For example, a wetland buffer may consist of wet meadow or riparian vegetation in temporarily saturated areas at the wetland edge, or mesic prairie and grassland plantings in upland areas beyond. So the City has a clear understanding of what restoration plantings are planned for the open space areas within Outlot G on the development site, the landscaping plan should be revised to further differentiate proposed land covers according to the following guidelines: • Areas for low mow "eco- turf." • Stormwater pond seed mix (on slopes of stormwater facilities). • Wetland buffer rehabilitation seed mix (inter- seeding into established vegetation along existing wetland edges, as long as monoculture stands of switchgrass, canary reed grass or Kentucky bluegrass are not present). • Wet meadow / wet prairie seed mix (for saturated or regularly flooded zones; State wet meadow / wet prairie mixes are designed to be used from the planned edge of open water to around 1.5 feet in elevation). • Mesic prairie seed mix (for sunny zones that will not experience saturation or flooding; State upland seed mixes are used starting at approximately 1.5 feet above open water). • Woodland edge grassland seed mix (for partly shaded zones along shrub or tree lines). Lawn Areas. In addition to wetland buffer seeding, the developer wishes to maintain areas of lawn in the central open space area. Low -mow eco -turf is being used to provide a manicured edge to the native planting areas, and two maintained lawn areas are shown for un- programmed recreational opportunities as well. The width of the low mow eco -turf can be minimal for it to serve its purpose as a manicured edge to natural areas. Mowed lawns abutting natural areas already provide a manicured edge that is distinct from native plantings, so the addition of low mow eco -turf outside of parcel boundaries is largely unnecessary. Currently, large areas of the open space / conservation area in Outlot G are occupied by the proposed low mow eco -turf, which has significantly less benefit from a conservation standpoint then the naturalized wetland and prairie plantings that are being recommended by the City. Please adjust the landscaping plan to implement the minimal area necessary for the low mow eco -turf, more closely reflecting the areas recommended on attached Exhibit E - Eco -Turf Recommendations. The low mow eco -turf can be a positive alternative to mowed lawn in the overall landscape plan. It has a moderate tolerance to heavy foot traffic and is slow growing. It may be a suitable alternative to standard lawn in the un- programmed recreation areas currently identified as "maintained lawn" on the landscape plan. Also, it is recommended that eco -turf be provided continuously to a 3 ft. depth along the edge of bituminous trails through the site, to provide a manicured, low maintenance edge for that use. See Exhibit E - Eco -Turf Recommendations. Low mow eco -turf areas shown along the perimeter of single family lots should be permitted to grow naturally to their full height (e.g. 12 to 18 inches, but may be variable depending on seed mix). This will reduce maintenance requirements, and will allow the eco -turf to function well with regards to stormwater treatment and wildlife habitat. Restoration Plantings. The developer has engaged the Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company in creating a vegetation management plan for the wetland and open space plantings on the site, which is to be provided to the watershed district for review. The management plan shall also be provided to the City for consideration, and shall address the preparation, planting, and maintenance of open space / conservation areas. The following is a general list of issues that should be addressed in the management plan (it is possible that the Watershed District has further recommendations for the vegetation management plan; the following recommendations do not supersede the Watershed District review, but should be considered supplementary): Preparation of Sites. Address how the site will be prepared for wetland buffer / stormwater treatment / conservation plantings. 1) Transition from existing land cover — e.g., Inventory herbaceous vegetation around existing wetland areas; identify advantageous / native species worth protecting; identify invasive species that should be removed. 2) Provide a plan for invasive removal - The Shorewood Zoning Ordinance requires submission of a plan identifying aggressive or invasive exotic plants as described in Minnesota Non - Native Terrestrial Plants: An Identification Guide for Resource Managers and a program for eradicating or managing the exotic plants. Removal of invasive species may include a combination of mowing, prescribed burning, tilling, scrapping, digging, inundation (for perennial weeds such as reed canary grass) or herbicide application. Non - herbicide methods are preferred over herbicide intensive methods to protect beneficial plants and animals. 3) Prepare seedbeds for naturalized plantings — Any tilled soils should be rolled to prevent seed from being buried too deep, but the soil surface should not be so hard packed or smooth that seeds are lost or have a difficult time establishing. If inter - seeding is intended, site preparation could include the removal of thatch through burning or haying to provide light for seedlings. Alternatively, planting nodes could be cultivated within larger areas for native seeding over time. Short -lived cover crops could be planted to help stabilize project sites, minimize the need for additional mulch, build up the health of site soils, and provide time to observe and treat weed issues. Cover crops are harvested or mowed before maturity to prevent re- seeding. Examples include oats or winter wheat, or slough grass in wet areas. Planting. Identify intended wetland buffer / stormwater treatment / conservation area plantings, and describe the proposed planting schedule and method. 1) Seed mixes - The developer shall provide a list of intended seed mixes by land cover type. Seed mixes could include the collection of seed from the project site or nearby natural areas, or may consist of State seed mixes, private vendor mixes, or custom mixes developed for site conditions. State seed mixes are developed for a variety of project types (e.g. wetlands, prairies, forest edges, roadsides, riparian areas, and stormwater treatment systems), and are designed to increase diversity, create competition for invasive species, and promote plant community resiliency. 2) Planting dates — According to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, spring seeding is favored for native grass establishment, and fall seeding is favored for planting forb, sedge, and rush seed to allow winter conditions to break down seed coats. Further, dormant seeding (after November 1St and before the soil freezes in the fall, or shortly before snowmelt in the spring) could be employed. Dormant seeding is beneficial for pollinator projects with a high percentage of forbs (which the developer has indicated they would like to pursue), or when a wet site is inaccessible for planting after the spring snowmelt due to wet conditions. If the wetland buffer will be established in the spring / early summer, or will have fluctuating water levels, is would be better to seed later in the spring after water levels stabilize, but not later than June 30th when high summer temperatures can result in a loss of seedlings. 3) Planting considerations — Upland seed mixes can be broadcast or drill seeded, or explain alternative methods proposed. When applicable, it may be helpful to overlap wetland and upland seed mixes to account for unknown hydrology levels where the zones meet. 5 When applicable, steps should be taken to prevent upland soils from eroding into wetland areas and cover wetland seeding. Temporary cover crops or additional weed -free mulch can be used for this purpose. Maintenance. Restoration project maintenance is essential to ensuring long range success. The developer should provide a vegetation management plan for wetland buffer / stormwater treatment / conservation area plantings, including: 1) A schedule summarizing maintenance activities on a monthly basis to guide contractors and project managers. 2) Information on problematic weed species for the Minnetonka Country Club site, and how they should be controlled over time (which may be addressed in an invasive species identification and management plan). 3) A description of management methods, which could include mowing to allow sufficient light to reach native plant seedlings and to prevent weed seed production; hand weeding to control small populations of weeds and as opposed to using herbicides in wetland / pond areas; biological control methods; prescribed burning to remove thatch, control invading wood plants in wetland and prairie areas, and to maintain diversity in prairie plantings; spot treatments of weeds; and woody tree control in prairie planting areas. Open Space Service Facility Ownership and Management, and Park Dedication. PUDs are required to contain provisions to assure the operation and maintenance of open space and service facilities. Such facilities may be placed under the ownership of a Property Owners Association, when the facilities serve all residents of the development, or may be dedicated to the public when a community wide use is anticipated (as in the case of the Outlot G open space and conservation areas shown on the submitted plans). Further, all new subdivisions are required to provide a park dedication in the form of land or a fee in lieu of land. It appears that the dedication of open space areas within the development for public use may serve as park dedication for the development. The developer shall continue to work with the City to address issues of open space dedication, and otherwise address the design and maintenance of open space and green areas within the development via the finalized development agreement. Tree Preservation and Replacement. Number of Trees. Mattamy Homes performed an inventory of all significant trees on the site. The tree inventory identifies tree species, the diameter of trees at breast height, the number of tree stems, whether the tree was removed or saved, and the number of replacement trees required. A total of 988 significant trees will be removed from the site in the course of development. Many of the trees located in an area of sedge- meadow in the northwest corner of the site will be removed in the creation of the age targeted lots along Ayrshire Lane. rel The City of Shorewood's Tree Preservation and Replacement Policy caps total tree replacement at 8 trees per disturbed acre. The submitted landscape plan indicates that 79 acres will be disturbed, and identifies the replacement requirement as 316 trees (which is based on a 4 trees per acre replacement). The actual requirement for 79 acres would be 632 replacement trees. While the project will meet and exceed the tree replacement requirement with a total of 767 new trees planted onsite, the landscape plan must be amended to reflect the correct replacement requirement. In addition, at a meeting with the developer it was indicated that actual disturbed acres may be 82 acres. The tree replacement requirement must reflect the most recent calculation of disturbed area. Replacement trees will include 282 street trees, 241 buffer / accent trees, and 244 lot trees (two per standard lot, and one per age targeted lot). In addition, 12 trees will be transplanted from onsite for use in a memorial green design. Tree Species. The plant schedule lists the species of trees that will be planted on the site, however the landscape plan does not currently identify where specific trees will be planted. The City requires this information to verify that there will be a balance of tree diversity on the site, and that trees will be suitable for the conditions shown. An annotation on the plan indicates that this information will be provided in the final landscape plan version. Pre - settlement vegetation on the site would have been Big Woods, consisting of a combination of hardwoods (oak, maple, basswood and hickory). Elms, ironwood, and aspen would also have been common in this forest system. According to the Shorewood Tree Preservation and Replacement Policy it is the policy of the City to recognize and preserve existing natural resources of the community. With this goal in mind, the ratio of tree plantings on the final landscape plan shall emphasize the replacement of native trees on the site, and shall attempt to diversify plantings so that no one species is planted over others. Proposed tree species do appear to correspond to the City's recommendation for replacement trees. A few additional species are being provided, including species of Elm, Maple, Aspen, Birch, and Serviceberry. While Elm is not a City recommended tree, the varieties proposed are Dutch Elm Disease resistant and hardy to the growing zone. The following are specific comments pertaining to tree species proposed: 1) Accolade, Princeton and Discovery Elms. To increase diversity of replacement trees, it is recommended that one of these cultivars be replaced with the native Hackberry tree, which his recommended for the area by the City, the University of Minnesota Extension Service, and the State of Minnesota. Discovery Elms are slower growers, in which case the Hackberry, generally a fast growing tree, may be an advantageous substitute. 2) Autumn Blaze and Sienna Glen Maples. These both provide attractive fall color and function well in urban settings, and Sienna Glen Maples are specifically recommended by the University of Minnesota Extension Service for Minnesota landscapes. However, Autumn Blaze Maples are typically over planted. Please provide information demonstrating that maple tree plantings will be equally balanced between Autumn Blaze, Sienna Glen, and native Sugar Maple plantings. 7 3) Whitespire Birch. River Birches are recommended by the City and the State of Minnesota for the area, and may either supplement or replace the proposed Whitespire Birches. Please confirm that Whitespire Birch trees are suitable for the zone, or replace with City recommended varieties. Tree Size. Proposed deciduous trees range in size from 2 inches to 2.5 inches in caliper, and evergreen trees are to be 8 feet in height. The City's tree replacement policy requires that deciduous replacement trees be a minimum of 3 inches in caliper and evergreen replacement trees be a minimum of 6 feet in height. The planting schedule must be revised to require deciduous trees a minimum of 3 inches in diameter. Street Trees. In discussing the issue of street trees the applicant and the City arrived at the consensus that the care and maintenance of trees in the public rights of way would be the responsibility of the homeowner's association. This contingency will be addressed in declaration of covenants for the development. Other Site Landscaping. The submitted landscape plan illustrates gateway entrance landscaping designs at Wooden Cleek Drive and Smithtown Road, Ayrshire Lane and Smithtown Road, and Club Valley Road and Yellowstone Trail (See Exhibit A - Preliminary Landscape Plan and Details). The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District review of submitted plans will provide feedback on the issue of the entrance design at Ayrshire Lane in relation to the wetland areas in the northwest corner of the development site. With regards to the zoning review, the final landscaping plan will need to provide additional information as to proposed shrub, grass and perennial species, including identifying plant sizes. The Shorewood Zoning Ordinance requires tall shrubs to be a minimum of 3 to 4 feet in height upon installation, and low shrubs to be 18 to 24 inches in height upon installation. Notes on proposed tree species and tree sizing are provided earlier in the report. Illustrated plant spacing on the landscape plan meets City requirements. Plant centers in the northeast entry detail must be shifted minimally south to adhere to the requirement that a 3 foot distance be maintained to the property line. Upon installation, all landscaping is required to adhere to general landscaping criteria provided in the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance, Section 1201.03, Subd. 2.G. Required Landscaping and Screening. Traffic Visibility. On corner lots in all districts, no structure or planting in excess of 30 inches above the street center line grade shall be permitted within a triangular area defined as follows: beginning at the intersection of the projected property lines of two intersecting streets, thence 30 feet along one property line, thence diagonally to a point 30 feet from the point of beginning. It appears that the entry monuments at Ayrshire Lane, Wooden Cleek Drive, and Club Valley Road fall within the traffic visibility triangle and will need to be adjusted to fall outside of the described zone. In addition, the landscape plan shows that a variety of plantings will fall within the visibility triangle, including perennials, small grasses, small deciduous shrubs, medium ornamental grasses, medium evergreen shrubs, and large deciduous shrubs. Height and species for these plantings have not yet been provided. At the time of final plat review the landscape plan and planting schedule must demonstrate that all plants within the visibility triangle will adhere to the 30 inch height limitation. Sidewalks and Trails. The City and the community have expressed interest in seeing open space in the development preserved for public use. In response, the developer has clustered homes on the site to better preserve natural features, and is providing a combination of sidewalks and trails for pedestrian access to the neighborhood and open space areas. In the submitted plan set sidewalks are provided along one side of the main roads through the subdivision, including the following: 1) The west side of Wooden Cleek Drive, to where it meets Smithtown Rd. 2) The north side of Bentgrass Way, from Wooden Cleek Drive to Ayrshire Lane. 3) The west side of Ayrshire Lane, to where it meets Smithtown Road. 4) The east side of Club Valley Road, to where it meets Yellowstone Trail. The Shorewood Subdivision Ordinance does not identify a requirement for the provision of sidewalks in new subdivisions. And the sidewalks provided in the development plan so far are in response to initial discussions with the City regarding what minimum access and pedestrian movement is necessary. That said, if the development would like to provide community access to open space within, sidewalk and trail connectivity should be a priority and the current plan can be revised to better accomplish this goal. One concern with the current sidewalk design is that it fails to provide an accessible circulation design for the age targeted lots located along Ayrshire Lane, which will receive a significant amount of the sites traffic due to its intersection with Smithtown Road. Safe, off - street circulation options are particularly important for age targeted residents. This population may have special mobility needs, and are a portion of the population that may be more interested in walking opportunities. It is recommended that the developer provide sidewalks east along the age targeted lots that meet Country Club Lane on Bentgrass Way. A sidewalk in this location at the east end of Bentgrass Way, from Wooden Cleek Drive to the east end of the Bentgrass Way cul -de -sac, would also improve access to the development site from Country Club Road and Badger Park. Pedestrian use of the site could be further improved by providing sidewalks on both sides of the street where internal circulation meets sidewalks or trails outside of the development. Aside from providing connectivity for subdivision residents, sidewalk access sends the message to the community that the unique trail and open space amenities within the development are something that is being shared with neighbors. Areas for sidewalks on both side of the road could include Ayrshire Lane (as described above), Wooden Cleek Drive, and Club Valley Road from Yellowstone Trail north to the beginning of the internal trail circulation. Exhibit F - Sidewalk Circulation Recommendations illustrates areas where additional sidewalks are recommended. At the City's request, an off -road 8 foot bituminous trail has been provided along the west edge of Country Club Road. The trail begins at the intersection of Country Club Road and Smithtown Road, and terminates approximately 600 feet before the intersection of Country Club Road and Yellowstone Trail. The developer has indicated that the trail is terminated where it is because natural conditions associated with two wetlands to be protected south E towards Yellowstone Trail pose a challenge with regards to trail placement. In addition, the parcel at the intersection has steep topographical conditions that would require the construction of retaining walls for a trail, and the property is in separate ownership from the developer. It is possible that in the future the City may adjust the Country Club Road rights -of- way to the east, which could provide flexibility in extending a trail all the way south to Yellowstone Trail without requiring the construction of a retaining wall along the southern most Country Club Road property. Alternatively, the City discussed the option of extending the Country Club Road trail west around the wetlands and into the Minnetonka Country Club development, but it was decided that the option of moving the trails closer to private homes is not ideal. How this option might be pursued without impeding on private properties could be explored. For example, the developer could identify options for employing screening or trail beautification to minimize visual impacts on nearby homes. In addition, the City and the developer could discuss how the trail could be engineered to bypass the wetlands on the southeast portion of the site. For example, a number of wetland projects incorporate interconnected trails and boardwalks to allow trail users to pass over wet areas. Boardwalks become an amenity, providing a unique opportunity for trail users to experience wetland plants and hydrologic conditions up close. Education or interpretation materials pertaining to wetland plants and animals could be incorporated in the boardwalk design to provide additional attraction to the site. It is possible that steep grades or existing vegetation in the area may prevent this possibility, but it may be an option to explore. An 8 foot bituminous trail also winds its way through the interior of the development site, past proposed open space and wetland areas. A spur of the internal trail begins at the bituminous trail running south along Country Club Road. This trail spur heads southwest to Club Valley Road, past a stormwater treatment area, and outlets on the sidewalk on the east side of the road. At that point, trail users need to walk south along the Club Valley Road sidewalk and must cross the street to pick up the trail again, which heads west into the sizable open space area in the south portion of the development. From there, the trail goes north through interesting wetland, tree, and restoration areas. Several trail overlook opportunities are identified along the way. The trail then goes north to Bentgrass Way, and at that point trail users must cross the road to use the sidewalk on the north side of Bentgrass Way to exit the site via Ayrshire Lane or Wooden Cleek Drive. The internal trial appears to does a nice job of exposing trail users to a variety landscapes within the conservation area. The trail plan could be further improved in the following ways (as shown on attached Exhibit G - Trail Circulation Recommendations): • Connect the separate trail spurs in a more intuitive manner, or provide clear signage so trail users are able to easily navigate the trails into and out of the development site. In particular, the trail jog between the east spur (where it meets Club Valley Road) and the trail within the Outlot G open space area should be examined for its usability. • Trail directional signage may be considered if the trail itself is not altered, to provide a more clear connection where the trail spurs intersect with roadways. 10 ® Interpretation or educational signage may be incorporated along the trail within the open space / conservation area, highlighting native plants and animals or the history of the site. ® A proposal for trail amenities (e.g. seating, trash / recycling receptacles, etc.) may be identified for trial overlook areas or other locations along the trail. ® Pedestrian safety measures, such as pedestrian crosswalk striping or alternate paving, should be integrated on roadways where trail users must cross roads. In addition, pedestrian signage may be incorporated identifying the trail crossing locations. RECOMMENDATION The submitted preliminary plat plan set is found to address the requirements of the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan and the Shorewood Zoning Ordinance, and is recommended for approval contingent on the developer addressing the following items prior to submission of the final plat plan set for review: 1) The developer must demonstrate that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has reviewed and approved the wetland permit for the project. 2) As conditions permit, given the proposed location of parcels, wetland buffers (in combination with adjacent natural areas) shall be increased to a minimum of 50 feet. 3) The developer shall verify that wetland buffer monuments will be provided. 4) Revise the landscaping plan to address the following: a) Differentiate proposed land covers according to the guidelines discussed in this report, and provide a list of intended seed mixes. b) Amend low mow eco -turf areas to more closely reflect the recommended eco -turf zones illustrated on Exhibit E - Eco -Turf Recommendations. c) Reflect the correct tree replacement requirement, based on an eight trees per disturbed acre calculation and a total disturbed acreage of 82 acres. d) List proposed perennial, grass, and shrub species in the plant schedule. e) Identify where specific tree, shrub, grass, and perennial species will be planted on the site. f) Address the balance of tree species to be planted on the site by listing total trees by species on the plant schedule. The final tree planting proposal must emphasize the replacement of native trees (or native cultivars), and attempt to diversify plantings so that no one species is planted over another. 11 g) Address questions regarding tree species selection discussed in this report, and incorporate Hackberry trees in the planting plan. h) Increase the size of deciduous replacement trees to 3 inches in caliper, as required by the City's tree replacement policy. i) Identify the size of shrubs shown on the landscaping plan, which must meet the City's minimum size requirements. j) Shift plant centers in the northeast entry detail south to adhere to the 3 foot distance requirement from property lines. k) Adjust the entry detail landscaping plans to move entry monuments and plantings in excess of 30 inches from the traffic visibility zone. 5) Provide a vegetation management plan to the City for consideration, which shall address the preparation, planting, and maintenance of open space and conservation areas on the site as discussed in this report. 6) Provide a plan for identifying aggressive or invasive exotic plants as described in Minnesota Non - Native Terrestrial Plants: An Identification Guide for Resource Managers and a program for eradicating or managing the exotic plants on the site. 7) Revise pedestrian circulation on the site to provide the additional sidewalk options identified on Exhibit F - Sidewalk Circulation Recommendations. 8) Work with the City to address how the bituminous trail running south along Country Club Road may be extended all the way to Yellowstone Trail in the current development phase, or at a later date. 9) Revise plans for trail circulation on the site to address the issues raised in this report and shown on attached Exhibit G - Trail Circulation Recommendations. 12 F Ii L T a. • a �9 w a•: o ait M, M5 elk _ � ■■�s dpi �0 � ,�►►•' ® ..aa .�, a �-�.� M li �`4� i •'� , r i . M i ENTRANCE` MONU E - M NT' � > : - gAj;N�Cx � \ l M1 I __ -- pp I 1 t c\ r I M. 1 1 - 4 141.41 il \.m .i. I 614' .6 • ;d { It 1� E- 1 I - I 1 1 - r. I I S 1 I I 1 I I \ Ii a I 1¢31 a /• - f n I 1 I r. I I' t I I 1 MA TCH SHEET 1 1 ti 4! •1 •t, IUTA TCH SH E T2 1` ! I I � •llilATC I `I I H�SHEET 2 1� - 1 , 1 - B - r 1 � s , II r Landscape Requirements t. Legend ,1y - ��$$ Typical Eco-Turf Example TREE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS' 316 TREES REQUIRED NATIVE BUFFER SEEDING hT•E STRfP. ,BrF waeP uTE,nn>_ raw uP«nBa TO Easr TRAIL OVERLOOK (4 trees per disturbed acres) . PLANT Wry - DO NOT n ..— 3T — w . (POLLINATOR) a A \= D e�aruL srsl. r r+r wrN �EanE.o zEr sDES 11. eaT— OF w,re P -ciFlt ,D uEF'GU! sA4'1aR0 EOB —y srcoc roB uT•uPn enu T ro oc PLC,YTm OPPOATUNLTEES _ - - OVERALL TREES PROVIDED: 781 TREES PRO\ADED LA28 tl STREET TREES (60' spocing, typ): • BUFFER /ACCENT TREES: 294 TREES 241 TREES '. ECO TURF 'LOW MOW' LAWN f TRAn.HRAD OPPORTUNITIES - • LOT TREES (by Builder): 244 TREES LOT TREES (PROVIDED BY BUILDER) W13PLAND MITEGATION SAVED TREE CANOPY LINE 2 additional trees to be provided by builder after home construction is complete; (1 addtionol tree per small lot) EXISTING WETLAND - ar'�• -",= DENOTES EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE TO REMAIN DEMOTES E M I NG DBMUOUS '. . TREE TO REMAIN Weslwxtl Prohxional SeMtte, Irw 7699 Anagrmn orive Eden Pr —, l4N 65361 PHOt� 952 - 837 -515D PA% esz- 937.ba22 �,,f Tau- 1- 886937 -5150 Westwood wmv.westwoodpsmm t hueby mWy Wet WL P'ea wu pn{srW by me m urea my Revldons dlmtt evpuWefa+ and ibt I em •duly Ifine! IAN¢SCAP6 AflQIIil�r 1e the 4rre M Ite Nafe of HL'mmet Cory Meyer Dctm 11/3/15 Lk— N. 26971 Deatpxk cEAt Prepared for. L•AG -kd: aM Dews NTe3 Rang[ Dra W 1m/dstc Kitam Homes 7201 Washington Avenue South, Suite 201 Edina, Minnesota 55439 Il. 0' 100' 200' 300' PEUO = n .11 nw ncwi ! rens°�nc � cavr�,E'n n1N r nag seem u�Dl ,En EPEaiEDAT —11 TAO L$41!\ IS£AS xwicr s.RTM �•a 63rrn! aF Ne-P� o— calrraEa sca ! 9 nrru PEUIT ar 1N4 sPeorw ,c scn nN as uawc,so .r cartASOn r— sat al & PERENNM iER PWIRNG ) ,<.B DN onR ca.ETP u'.rs � 7sov DB ro rasr = a,vT,m ANO T40E ao,T Sul O.R[ raEE ,0,0- w , a:0 Pa mtCPnENe ON POI,LRInEnE 10 PEA ��-mN 00 NOT PEE APAHSTr1R h5X iDEFP WATEianO 50.4N. Pwrr P.T Yfrx SPEC61Ea B0.CMill1 SQL 6CU8£Y :DES RI.D 00T1w Q EVERGREEN TREE PLANPNG PR01lc as wm+1 OON L.SOIPE e9AYGNES. bovnE LEADEz ,nNC srsS as r.Ewrt<, '. ecov=sl 1 un cccu'rnuus rracs TOP $TF{'1$ 5' A50 E CA =, Wa +. D.x io rs,sr ePnnat t. h51 Or 'ESIV3L) i" 0B E4GII,R 011'9!0 POSTE ,1y - ��$$ PA BE 2- %751E¢�DELEf n.�W � FOStS. PL„tt ] POS15 [aHA,R. ARd= \0 Boor out scary La:G PO t0 POSID WM 16" PiW00P,t➢.£ bt ParElNna.0 w uL, u• hT•E STRfP. ,BrF waeP uTE,nn>_ raw uP«nBa TO Easr �w..cuNE aa.1 ns rar5�o. PIACE t!VNT DEPRI FS �Ea,tED . PLANT Wry - DO NOT n ..— 3T — w T ti - ` a A \= D e�aruL srsl. r r+r wrN �EanE.o zEr sDES 11. eaT— OF w,re P -ciFlt ,D uEF'GU! sA4'1aR0 EOB —y srcoc roB uT•uPn enu T ro oc PLC,YTm @A� ,lsrtn eewl.-w.LBE uN G � E �o `"� �a�,m Sa I ,<rcND '0 cE9 BA,Wta1 tliWh5r1\E whl FV191ED 91E OEOnUGUS TREE V PLANTNG LA28 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0004775PLP01 Minnetonka Date 11/3/15 Sheet 1 OF 3 Country Club Preliminary Landscape Plan Minnetonka'Minnesota - EXHIBIT A F 02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. III S 3 t — N L•� 1 I \ I it iI - 1 , L rl I � � dAtl i - t 4 A JA TCH SHEET 1 - �o MA TCH SH ET 2 L K 1 - - I' - - `I.. _. I m MATCH BHEET 2 _ 1 .I _ \ . ✓.. - - 7�_ I � } 1 I - I \. I i. I - 1 I I I I 1 � f, I 4'- i I t; 1 h ' I' I: I _ 4 I 1 iJl 4 i I N - / I _ j 1 I _ I X61 I f I i MAINTAINED` TURF ARE \: : �•' _ —__ _�. . J: ,n: � t. _ -. -__ _ ' \ ✓ ..,:� ;M t, "� _ _� - J. Preliminary Plant Schedule Single Family SYMBOL —71 I I I ' N ; \ .; J _ PROT OTY. COMMON BOTANICAL NAME SIZE SPACING O.C. I— I 1'I N L R x STREET TREES 282 Y \ I. A INTAINED Ali' _ -_ �_� —,� 1 i I '� N+. 1 �•\ ��: T RF AREAI BUFFER/ACCENT 35 TREES 1 � — — ; \�, � \g ., ' _ \ \,. ,�.• � � _ � rtl a .. ��, \� SEE NORTH WEST��i�� , �. ENTRANCE'€ lL 1—.`� \� MAINTAINED rt ... .. TURF AREA MEMORIAL TREES 12 On —site deciduous trees to be rela oted F t 1 1 1 a _ \ , � ' � ../,<...,.. ; i ,, • ,.. \, •: ,.., ..\ , : . 1 i,r .: �;1 . . .• ; t .:f \` 7. �\r ;:C * .•' • `'ti 1 t • � I Thornless Co cksop/ u r M o Hawthorn rief irCe rat aea us c s all BB CL AS S HOVN EE Jo o e se Te Li la c S rn o etiva a 6' HT BB CLUMP AS SHOVN it' QD Allegheny Se rviceberr Y / Amelan drier laems UMP AS SHOIM ORNAMEJTAL 3 2 —Quaking Aspen / Populus tremulo,des 2 � 86 AS SHOAJ r,e R b lu R ose 2° 88 AS SHOVM Pr—,en Cr b 2° BB ENTRANCE P fu so Cr o b A auu s s AS SHOVM 2" BB MONUMENT. . ' ,. , I, Spring Snow Crab 1olus 'Spring Snow AS SHOV44 2" BE AS SHOWN COLUMNS 'Red Splendor' Red Crob Molus 2° 68 AS SHOYR'1 EVERGREEN 171 Black Hills Spruce / Plcea olouca densoto 8' HT„ BB Colorado Green Spruce / Picea p un ens AS SHOWN, SHOVBJ N _ N ",yq, _I Austrion Pine / lnus nigro `_ ,� \ s >,. _ - -- - •4, \/ w v -- _ N N ,4 n i I Norway Pine / Plnus resinoso 8' HT BB AS SHOWN ...(b 8 HT BB AS SHOV'M �Nyh / Pmus sylvestr(s 8' HT BB AS SHOYPJ o Sco Pine r _. e / P 8' 66 AS SHOVM White nus s rob s NOTE: P Pi- ON I PLAN SUPERSEDE LIST QUANTITIES IN THE EVENT OF A DISCREPANCY. r a ° r Legend M N ------------------ _ ___ TRAIL TEI (POLLINA OR) OUNTITS f 1RAILMAD OPPORTUNITIES 0' 100' 200' 300' /;' // / e I• ... _� _._ I HCO TURF 'TAW MOW" LAWN ._ n_ WEI'LAND MITIGATION 9AVBD TRIM CANOPY L1NB !r DR40THS EISTING CONIFEROUS H JQtING WF iAND TREE TO REtvfAIN 1 / DENOTES EXISTIN G DECIDUOUS I I I I TREE TO HHMAAIN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION / N03775FLP02.dn wa rwBen Prof -ion s.,Vwa, we F X,,,yy �,,, y uut ,,,, Minnetonka Date 11/3/15 sl4eec 2 of 3 µan wva p.ap.M by ma a wAa ny 1 1 1659 AnaBramadm duen .sp.,waa aae ib.t r.m. may urzrd twNr>rcnes R°�'i�„ ,,. ettt Prepared for. Matta my Homes ®' 9 tre� l� y PreliliiinaTy Eden Prairie,NN 65314 A4 ❑afHR mdu ibe ht.s d a:a abS � C@ i `dV 6A. PHO FAX r 962.93, -6,60 Landscape Plan FAX 852- 93).6822 Dra%'c N76f rou.n� ra3ss3y.st6o Cory Meyer c>v�na �/ 7201 Washington Avenue South, Suite 201 p Westwood wuw.werivaodp om o.� 11/3/15 xa 26971 FAina, Minnesota 55439 _ Minnetonka,Mianesota EXHIBIT A F 02015 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Northeast Entry Detail ONE Southeast Entry Detail Northwest Entry Detail WAM 11 ]rvd MED. ORNAMENTAL - \\ GRASS ENTRY M. UM COLUMN ENTRY MONUMENT SHREDDED/HARDWOOD ,.` SM. DECIDUOUS COLUMN -I - -__ -I- -- SHRUB SHREDDED HARDWOOD ;BARK MULCH - BARK MULCH EDGING _ a - � PERENNIALS /SM. GRASSES (TYP.) ie i A EDGING (TYP.) / LG. DECIDUOUS SHRUB I J I I - NOTES: • SPECIFIC PLANT SPECIES A14D AMOUNTS WILL BE CALLED OUT IN THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN. • PLANTING BED EDGING AND PLANTS MAY BE FIELD FIT BASED ON EXACT LOCATION OF EXISTING TREES L i —,I A ml m•3 am t I vm• &0y ti by me m vela ay dune wpm ->�m .na wi i .m . a„q u®.®1 wroulrs ABQIIf�f ®L¢ fk 45r• N as 6h4 of 33m�r. Cory Meyer D� 11/3/15 c xa 26971 Planting Notes 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT COMMON GROUND ALLIANCE AT 811 OR CALL811.COM TO VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROU14D UTILITIES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY PLANTS OR LANDSCAPE MATERIAL. 2. ACTUAL LOCATION O PLANT MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS. 3. NO PLANTING MILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEIN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA, 4. ALL SUBSTITUTIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF ANY BID AND /OR QUOTE BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. 5, CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TWO YEAR GUARANTEE OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS. THE GUARANTEE BEGINS ON THE DATE OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S OR OWNER'S WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE OF THE INITIAL PLANTING. REPLACEMENT PLANT MATERIAL SHALL HAVE A ONE YEAR GUARANTEE COMMENCING UPON PLANTING. 6. ALL PLANTS TO BE SPECIMEN GRADE, MINNESOTA -GROWN AND /CR HARDY. SPECIMEN GRADE SHALL ADHERE TO, BUT IS NOT LIMITED BY, THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS: ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM DISEASE, PESTS, WOUNDS, SCARS, ETC. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM NOTICEABLE GAPS, HOLES, OR DEFORMITIES. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM BROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES. ALL PLANTS SHALL HAVE HEAVY, HEALTHY BRANCHING AND LEAFING. CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL HAVE AN ESTABUSHED MAIN LEADER AND A HEIGHT TO WIDTH RATIO OF NO LESS THAN 5:3. 7. PLANTS TO MEET AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z60.1 -2004 OR MOST CURRENT VERSION) REQUIREMENTS FOR SIZE AND TYPE SPECIFIED. B. PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER MNLA & ANSI STANDARD PLANTING PRACTICES, 9. PLANTS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY PLANTED UPON ARRIVAL AT SITE. PROPERLY HEEL -IN MATERIALS IF NECESSARY; TEMPORARY ONLY. 10. PRIOR TO PLANTING, FIELD VERIFY THAT THE ROOT COLLAR /ROOT FLAIR IS LOCATED AT THE TOP OF THE BALLED & BURLAP TREE. IF THIS IS NOT THE CASE, SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED DOWN TO THE ROOT COLLAR /ROOT FLAIR. WHEN THE BALLED & 13URLAP TREE IS PLANTED, THE ROOT COLLAR /ROOT FLAIR SHALL BE EVEN OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. 11. OPEN TOP OF BURLAP ON BB MATERIALS; REMOVE POT ON POTTED PLANTS; SPLIT AND BREAK APART PEAT POTS. 12. PRUNE PLANTS AS NECESSARY - PER STANDARD NURSERY PRACTICE AND TO CORRECT POOR BRANCHING OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED TREES. 73. WRAP ALL SMOOTH- BARKED TREES - FASTEN TOP AND BOTTOM. REMOVE BY APRIL 1ST. 14. STAKING OF TREES OPTIONAL; REPOSITION, PLUMB AND STAKE IF NOT PLUMB AFTER ONE YEAR. 15. THE NEED FOR SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED UPON SITE SOIL CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR THE NEED OF ANY SOIL AMENDMENTS. 16. BACKFILL SOIL AIJD TOPSOIL TO ADHERE TO MN /DOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION 3877 (COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW) AND TO BE NATIVE TOP SOIL FROM SITE FREE OF ROOTS, ROCKS LARGER THAN ONE INCH, SUBSOIL DEBRIS, AND LARGE WEEDS UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. 17. FOUR INCHES OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH TO BE USED AROUND ALL TREES WITHIN TURF AREAS. 18. EDGING TO BE SPADED EDGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. SPADED EDGE TO PROVIDE V- SHAPED DEPTH AND WIDTH TO CREATE SEPARATION BETWEEN MULCH AND GRASS. UTILIZE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS FOR EDG114G (WHERE POSSIBLE. INDIVIDUAL TREES TO BE SPADED EDGE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 19. ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE SODDED OR SEEDED, AS NOTED, SOD TO BE STANDARD MINNESOTA GROWN AND HARDY BLUEGRASS MIX. FREE OF LAWN WEEDS. ALL TOPSOIL AREAS TO BE RAKED TO REMOVE DEBRIS AND ENSURE DRAINAGE. SEE FINAL LANDSCAPE AND GRADING PLANS FOR NATIVE SEEDING TYPES & SPECIFICATIONS. 20. PROVIDE IRRIGATION TO ALL SODDED AREAS ON SITE. IRRIGATION OF STREET TREES & BOULEVARD SOD AREAS TO BE RESPONSIBILITY OF INDIVIDUAL LOTS; BUFFER TREES IN OUTLOTS TO BE IRRIGATED BY DEVELOPER /HOA. NO IRRIGATION TO BE PROVIDED IN CITY OWNED OUTLOT AREAS, UNLESS OTHERWSE NOTED. IRRIGATION WILL BE DESIGN /BUILD BY LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. ALL INFORMATION ABOUT INSTALLAl1ON AND SCHEDULING CAN BE OBTAIINED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. 21. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE NECESSARY WATERING OF PLANT MATERIALS UNTIL THE PLANT IS FULLY ESTABLISHED OR IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS OPERATIONAL, OWNER WILL NOT PROVIDE WATER FOR CONTRACTOR. 22. REPAIR. REPLACE, OR PROVIDE SOD /SEED AS REQUIRED FOR ANY ROADWAY BOULEVARD AREAS ADJACENT TO THE SITE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION, 23. REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY FROM PLANTING OPERATIONS AT 110 COST TO OWNER. D.d.-d . Prepared for Ch.k.4 =1 D.— NTM RmN Dnwicg by /date NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Minnetonka Date: 11/3/15 Sheet 3 OF 3 attamy 'Homes Country Club Preliminary 7201 Washington Avenue South, Suite 201 Landscape Details .— Edina, Minnesota 55439 Minnetonka,Minnesota EXHIBIT A Westvrood P7ohssional SerA Inc 7659 A,ug Drive Ell, 1110, MN 65333 PHONE 952 -937 -5160 FA% 857- 937.582] iDlLFfiff 168 &437 -5160 �� WestvjoW YMW.We3two0dp- L i —,I A ml m•3 am t I vm• &0y ti by me m vela ay dune wpm ->�m .na wi i .m . a„q u®.®1 wroulrs ABQIIf�f ®L¢ fk 45r• N as 6h4 of 33m�r. Cory Meyer D� 11/3/15 c xa 26971 Planting Notes 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT COMMON GROUND ALLIANCE AT 811 OR CALL811.COM TO VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROU14D UTILITIES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY PLANTS OR LANDSCAPE MATERIAL. 2. ACTUAL LOCATION O PLANT MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO FIELD AND SITE CONDITIONS. 3. NO PLANTING MILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEIN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA, 4. ALL SUBSTITUTIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF ANY BID AND /OR QUOTE BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. 5, CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TWO YEAR GUARANTEE OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS. THE GUARANTEE BEGINS ON THE DATE OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S OR OWNER'S WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE OF THE INITIAL PLANTING. REPLACEMENT PLANT MATERIAL SHALL HAVE A ONE YEAR GUARANTEE COMMENCING UPON PLANTING. 6. ALL PLANTS TO BE SPECIMEN GRADE, MINNESOTA -GROWN AND /CR HARDY. SPECIMEN GRADE SHALL ADHERE TO, BUT IS NOT LIMITED BY, THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS: ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM DISEASE, PESTS, WOUNDS, SCARS, ETC. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM NOTICEABLE GAPS, HOLES, OR DEFORMITIES. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FREE FROM BROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES. ALL PLANTS SHALL HAVE HEAVY, HEALTHY BRANCHING AND LEAFING. CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL HAVE AN ESTABUSHED MAIN LEADER AND A HEIGHT TO WIDTH RATIO OF NO LESS THAN 5:3. 7. PLANTS TO MEET AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z60.1 -2004 OR MOST CURRENT VERSION) REQUIREMENTS FOR SIZE AND TYPE SPECIFIED. B. PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER MNLA & ANSI STANDARD PLANTING PRACTICES, 9. PLANTS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY PLANTED UPON ARRIVAL AT SITE. PROPERLY HEEL -IN MATERIALS IF NECESSARY; TEMPORARY ONLY. 10. PRIOR TO PLANTING, FIELD VERIFY THAT THE ROOT COLLAR /ROOT FLAIR IS LOCATED AT THE TOP OF THE BALLED & BURLAP TREE. IF THIS IS NOT THE CASE, SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED DOWN TO THE ROOT COLLAR /ROOT FLAIR. WHEN THE BALLED & 13URLAP TREE IS PLANTED, THE ROOT COLLAR /ROOT FLAIR SHALL BE EVEN OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. 11. OPEN TOP OF BURLAP ON BB MATERIALS; REMOVE POT ON POTTED PLANTS; SPLIT AND BREAK APART PEAT POTS. 12. PRUNE PLANTS AS NECESSARY - PER STANDARD NURSERY PRACTICE AND TO CORRECT POOR BRANCHING OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED TREES. 73. WRAP ALL SMOOTH- BARKED TREES - FASTEN TOP AND BOTTOM. REMOVE BY APRIL 1ST. 14. STAKING OF TREES OPTIONAL; REPOSITION, PLUMB AND STAKE IF NOT PLUMB AFTER ONE YEAR. 15. THE NEED FOR SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED UPON SITE SOIL CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR THE NEED OF ANY SOIL AMENDMENTS. 16. BACKFILL SOIL AIJD TOPSOIL TO ADHERE TO MN /DOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION 3877 (COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW) AND TO BE NATIVE TOP SOIL FROM SITE FREE OF ROOTS, ROCKS LARGER THAN ONE INCH, SUBSOIL DEBRIS, AND LARGE WEEDS UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. 17. FOUR INCHES OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH TO BE USED AROUND ALL TREES WITHIN TURF AREAS. 18. EDGING TO BE SPADED EDGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. SPADED EDGE TO PROVIDE V- SHAPED DEPTH AND WIDTH TO CREATE SEPARATION BETWEEN MULCH AND GRASS. UTILIZE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS FOR EDG114G (WHERE POSSIBLE. INDIVIDUAL TREES TO BE SPADED EDGE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 19. ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE SODDED OR SEEDED, AS NOTED, SOD TO BE STANDARD MINNESOTA GROWN AND HARDY BLUEGRASS MIX. FREE OF LAWN WEEDS. ALL TOPSOIL AREAS TO BE RAKED TO REMOVE DEBRIS AND ENSURE DRAINAGE. SEE FINAL LANDSCAPE AND GRADING PLANS FOR NATIVE SEEDING TYPES & SPECIFICATIONS. 20. PROVIDE IRRIGATION TO ALL SODDED AREAS ON SITE. IRRIGATION OF STREET TREES & BOULEVARD SOD AREAS TO BE RESPONSIBILITY OF INDIVIDUAL LOTS; BUFFER TREES IN OUTLOTS TO BE IRRIGATED BY DEVELOPER /HOA. NO IRRIGATION TO BE PROVIDED IN CITY OWNED OUTLOT AREAS, UNLESS OTHERWSE NOTED. IRRIGATION WILL BE DESIGN /BUILD BY LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. ALL INFORMATION ABOUT INSTALLAl1ON AND SCHEDULING CAN BE OBTAIINED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. 21. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE NECESSARY WATERING OF PLANT MATERIALS UNTIL THE PLANT IS FULLY ESTABLISHED OR IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS OPERATIONAL, OWNER WILL NOT PROVIDE WATER FOR CONTRACTOR. 22. REPAIR. REPLACE, OR PROVIDE SOD /SEED AS REQUIRED FOR ANY ROADWAY BOULEVARD AREAS ADJACENT TO THE SITE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION, 23. REPAIR ALL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY FROM PLANTING OPERATIONS AT 110 COST TO OWNER. D.d.-d . Prepared for Ch.k.4 =1 D.— NTM RmN Dnwicg by /date NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Minnetonka Date: 11/3/15 Sheet 3 OF 3 attamy 'Homes Country Club Preliminary 7201 Washington Avenue South, Suite 201 Landscape Details .— Edina, Minnesota 55439 Minnetonka,Minnesota EXHIBIT A M X 00 W Minnetonka Country Club - Environmental Analysis MnDNR Land Cover Classification System Legend Non - native deciduous forest - Non - native seasonally flooded deciduous forest - Buildings / Pavement (91 -100% impervious cover) - Long grasses on upland soils - Non - native dominated emergent vegetation - Short grasses and mixed trees (26 -50% impervious cover) - Short grasses and mixed trees (4 -10% impervious cover) Short grasses on upland soils ElShort grasses with sparse tree cover on upland soils MMCD Wet Areas N 0 250 500 1,000 Feet lea-I 000` 4 009 09Z 0 N deep jaa} £ AIlensn aalem luouewied - t, .t seem( AGp jo aawwnsplua ui Ino [up Aew pue `saeaA Bann ul aeGA ayj 10 Isoua pa6601 J@Ienn ao jam `aalenn AJeaodwal - 6'£ 0 11elleo ou `nnopeaua a6pas Allueulwopaid - Z'Z uoseas bulmoa6 ayj jo uonw buunp pau!eap Ilam AIlensn `aaleM �Jejoduaal - �* 1 - pua6a-j spuellom (Goww) IOIJISIG loa4uoo olinbsow uel!lodo.ilaW . r I 6.._.._.._.._..�.._..= .._.._.._.�..� D a -- �� j 'o j j f e h- SISAIeud JeJuauauoainu3 - qnlo fujunoC) a )iuo}auuiw U m X W =3 0 0 06 N, ) 0 E E w > Ud C: = =5 U) Li- &- 4-- 2 0 Co -0 Cl) < co CO _0 0 4-- -0 (D M C'4 CL Ico 0- a- X LU 4., Aj 7� trl P&I AM > lam X17 r� r13 to ED ia. -4! 01A ,j v er A Cr_ r_ r. M .:3 -u u 1 � C r C.- 'j. tj 4.4 lao L- V v z 75 co X LU NORTH W fill R `1 O, �n a a■ 1t NORT_ H m 2 w Building a legacy äÒ© legacy. 477 Temperance Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Tel: 651-286-8450 Fax: 651-286-8488 November 24, 2015 Mr. Brad Nielsen, Planning Director City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Re: Minnetonka Country Club Development Development Stage Plan Review City Project No. 14-13 WSB Project No. 02925-12 Dear Mr. Nielsen: We have reviewed the development stage plan submittal that inclu management plan, and soils report for the Minnetonka Country Club Development. Plans are prepared by Carlson McCain, dated October 30, 2015. We have the following comments and recommendations for the development stage plan review. General 1.Prior to the start of any construction, permits will need to be the following agencies: a.MPCA Construction General Permit b.Minnehaha Creek Watershed District c.WCA Wetland Permitting d.USACOE 2.A maintenance component to the Home Owners Association will be r stormwater treatment facilities will be maintained long term. T minimum include the following: a.Annual inspection b.Maintenance of all erosion control measures including, but not limited to: rip rap, s sewer outlets, catch basin inlets, etc. c.Verification of system drawdowns with 48 hours for infiltration d.Removal of trash and debris. Erosion and Sediment Control 1.The SWPPP shall provide the estimated quantities for all proposed erosion contro The quantities shall be sufficient to provide temporary erosion to meet the stabilization timeframes of the MPCA construction ge 2.Details shall be provided on the plans for the type of inlet protectio for all phases of construction, including existing streets adjacent to t occur. 3.All pond side slopes and slopes 3:1 or greater should be stabilized using erosion control blanket. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\02925-120\Admin\Docs\LTR_PTH-BNielsen-112115-Development Stag plan review - Submittal 1.docx Mr. Brad Nielsen November 24, 2015 Page 2 Grading Plan 1.Design certification for retaining wall systems will be required. Material types are to be identified with the construction plans. We recommend boulder or-cast segmental blocks be used for wall longevity. 2. appears this area can be graded to a 986 elevation north of the -de-sac. 3.Pond 4 is an existing wetland with proposed HWL of 985.2 and a N984.0. Seven adjacent east of the pond propose low floor elevations lower than the wetland NWL. Special foundation construction or foundation drain system lots. Soil borings 4 and 5 located east and west of the pond did not e the borings. The proposed surface grade at the building will be satisfactory runoff and the pond HWL. 4.The HWL for rear yard drainage structures needs to be provided on the grading plan. Drainage and utility easements will need to contain the proposed 100-year HWL elevations. 5.The storm water inlet to the south end of Pond 20 is not ideal f to the location of the pond outlet. The outlet could be moved to the next lot line north to balance spacing. 6.The storm sewer that drains the low point at station 7+00 on Clu realigned to be within the Outlot. 7.ovided for clarity. The grading plan shows grading and building type. 8.The low points, high points, and grade of the off-street trails should be shown on the grading plan. 9.Ponds 2 and 5 do not appear to provide at least 1 foot of freeboub Road. 10.The western boundary of the plat has some drainage that is tribu Block 1 and Outlot I. The existing storm drain system is to be 11.Additional comments on the grading plan may be forthcoming in future plan submittals. Streets, Sidewalks, and Trails 1.The proposed centerline of Ayrshire Lane intersects Smithtown Ro feet to the east from the centerline of Fairway Drive. 2.The intersection of Wooden Cleek Drive includes a landscape medi 18 feet proposed. The street lane widths need to be 20 feet in the north median nose needs to be south of the Smithtown Road right of way line to accmodate larger vehicle turning movements including snow plows. K:\02925-120\Admin\Docs\LTR_PTH-BNielsen-112115-Development Stag plan review - Submittal 1.docx Mr. Brad Nielsen November 24, 2015 Page 3 3.The Bentgrass Way cul-de-sac appears to be greater than 700 feet in length from Ayrshire 4.Sidewalk is recommended on both sides of Ayrshire Lane in the ag and Wooden Cleek Drive, since these streets will be the access points to Smi 5.WSB will provide the Smithtown Road East Sidewalk Extension side developers use in designing walk connections at intersections. 6.The trails and pond maintenance access adjacent to storm water ponds will need to have at least 1 foot of freeboard to the 100-year HWL. Pond 1 HWL appears to flood the trails and maintenance access and does not meet this requirement. 7.Pedestrian ramps will need to meet current ADA requirements. The MnDOT details are to be used for construction plans and the ramp layout will need to avo 8.Additional detailed design comments and recommendations will be plan submittals. Storm Water Management 1.The existing storm sewer outlet south of the plat to Lake Minnew will need to be rehabilitated or replaced depending upon the condition of the pi corrugated metal storm pipe is to be replaced in Shorewood. A p the City of Chanhassen and their requirements may vary from the City of Shorewood. 2.The culvert crossing Smithtown Road west of Ayrshire Lane is to development storm sewer system. 3.The storm water management plan indicates the estimated site imp construction is completed is estimated to be 20.37 acres. It is estimated that this num including the max allowable per lot impervious and the combinati trails could be as high as 22 percent. Provide calculations demonstrating how the site impervious percentage is as low as 17 percent. 4.The stormwater management plan indicates that volume control is exempt by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District; however this site should be classified as redevelopment and not new development, therefore triggering the redevelopment standard of their rule. This will require that their phosphorus control, rate control, and volume control standards be met. 5.The ed by ordinance, requires the abstraction via infiltration, evapotrans one inch of rainfall from the site. The applicant will need to d requirement. Where site soils do not allow infiltration flexibility may be given, but at a minimum the applicant will need to demonstrate through modeling that the increasing when comparing existing and proposed conditions. 6. ordinance, requires design calculations demonstrating that for the 1%, 10%, K:\02925-120\Admin\Docs\LTR_PTH-BNielsen-112115-Development Stag plan review - Submittal 1.docx Mr. Brad Nielsen November 24, 2015 Page 4 storm events that the runoff rates do not increase from pre-development conditions. The applicant has provided modeling demonstrating compliance with th 7. ordinance, requires treatment to NURP standards prior to storm w a lake, stream, or wetland and prior to discharge from the site. The apphas provided NURP ponding demonstrating compliance with this requirement. 8.The City of Shore ordinance, requires that the minimum building elevation shall be at l project 100-year water elevation. The following lot low openings shall be ad requirement: 33, 139, 140, 162, 163, 211, and 212. Wetlands 1.All wetland permitting and mitigation plans will need to be appr preliminary plat. 2.The City of Shorewood requires a 35-foot buffer adjacent to wetlands, watercourses, and lakes. The MCWD may have more stringent buffer standards and the most stringent requirement will apply. Sanitary Sewer and Watermain 1.The development proposes relocation of an existing MCES intercep quadrant of the plat. The proposed relocation will need to be papproved by the MCES. The MCES staff indicated they have not received plans to 2.Pond 10 may present access issues to the proposed relocated alig 3.The top of casting elevations for the sewer system will need to freeboard to any adjacent 100-year high water elevations. 4.The City Water Plan includes a future 12-inch watermain in Country Club Road. The City may require the extension of the 12-inch watermain through the development and reimburse the developer for oversizing costs. The City will model the water s determine the proposed 8-inch watermain is sufficient to supply the development. 5.The watermain is to extend from the cul-de-sacs along Country Club Road to the Country Club Road right of way for future looping of the distribution system of the develop 6.The hydrants will need to be spaced to provide coverage of the buildinwith a 250 foot radius from the hydrants. Lots 9, 12, 14, and 23 of Block 10; L Block 7 do not appear to meet this requirement. 7.The hydrant at the Smithtown Road and Ayrshire Lane will need to be relocated. 8.Additional gate valves will be needed throughout the development placed so that no more than 20 homes are out of water if a water K:\02925-120\Admin\Docs\LTR_PTH-BNielsen-112115-Development Stag plan review - Submittal 1.docx Mr. Brad Nielsen November 24, 2015 Page 5 shut down for maintenance. Phasing of the development will need to be considered with gate valve layout. 9.Additional sanitary sewer manholes are likely to reduce boulevar maintenance operations. 10.Watermain layout is to keep the watermain within one traffic lane for maintenance. 11.The sanitary sewer and watermain will be reviewed in detail with the construction p submittals. plates and typical sections for streets and trails. The City 2016 Specificat specifications and the CEAM Utility specifications. The details that will be brought to Council for acceptance at a future meeting. Please contact me if you have any questions or need any addition Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Paul Hornby, P.E. City Engineer (651) 286-8453 phornby@wsbeng.com ph K:\02925-120\Admin\Docs\LTR_PTH-BNielsen-112115-Development Stag plan review - Submittal 1.docx MINNEHAHA CREEK The ,All(r /7e; aho Creek ''Woter:sheo Distr ct is fi,o'erst;ip �c)1e its protectinci, irrsprovi'rrg and f7tanoging the surface P/Uteri CM' q,f"Ya ed t,. "rou( ",i,Jvllt£r lE?�t�Lt!C'eS v thin the District, irrcltrdinT their r lcttitnsir; :r,3 to th ecosystern� of vdlich they care cri integral pa?i. ✓Ve achieve ow mission thrnuyr l reg/dotion, Capital prgiec.ts, education,, cooperative endeovors, aril other prc�qll ois based on soil d science, innovative thinking, 01;l ir7foaved and engoged Constituency, and the gist effective use of publi funds. QUALITY OF WATER November 30, 2015 City of Shorewood Attn: Brad Nielson 5755 Country Club Rd. Shorewood, MN 55331 Dear Mr. Nielson, WATERSHED DISTRICT QUALITY OF LIFE Per your request, this letter is being provided to outline the level of coordination between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), the City of Shorewood (City), and Mattamy Homes (Developer), regarding the proposed redevelopment Minnetonka Country Club project. As you know, on November 19, 2015 MCWD convened a meeting to coordinate planning and agency review of the proposed development with the City of Shorewood and Mattamy Homes. To date MCWD has not received any plan or engineering submittals for review. However, at the November 19 meeting the following technical issues were identified on a preliminary basis: • It appears that the proposed stormwater management plan was developed to comply with "New Development" requirements of MCWD's Stormwater Management regulations, rather than "Redevelopment ". This may have resulted in undersized stormwater management facilities in the current proposal. Plans and calculations will need to be submitted before this can be verified. Meanwhile, MCWD, Mattamy Homes and Shorewood will continue coordinating on this issue. • Mattamy Homes proposes to open the historically restricted outlet from the site. In order to ensure no adverse downstream hydraulic issues are created, technical information will need to be provided and analyzed as part of the District's development review process. It is the District's understanding that the Minnetonka Country Club project will appear before the Planning Commission on December 1, 2015, and potentially City Council for preliminary plat review on December 14, 2015. During this time, and throughout the duration of the permitting process, District staff will continue to coordinate with the City and the developer to coordinate permitting processes and the satisfaction of all applicable District rules. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Tom Dietrich Permit & Compliance Coordinator CC: Rick Packer, Mattamy Homes November 3, 2015 Amended Concept PUD Plan and Development Stage PUD Narrative Minnetonka Country Club Shorewood, MN Request Mattamy Minneapolis, LLC (Applicant) is the owner of the property formerly known as the Minnetonka Country Club. Mattamy has obtained Concept PUD Approval from the City Council with conditions. Approval has been given to Mattamy Homes to demolish the buildings on-site and remove contaminated soils in the golf greens. Mattamy is currently requesting an amendment to the Concept PUD to incorporate two lots from an adjacent property (Venero Gardens) and Development Stage Approval of the entire development (142 units) Reason For Request It is Mattamy’s desire to develop the former golf course for residential uses utilizing a cluster design leaving approximately 43% of the site in public open space. The public open space will developed with passive open areas and trails. The trails will connect the open space to the proposed sidewalk on Smithtown Road and the proposed trail corridor along the west side of the trees that line Country Club Road. Development Plan Development Objectives The main objective of the plan is to preserve significant open space areas, dedicated to the public for its use as passive open space while clustering 142 proposed home sites on the higher areas of the site. The home sites will consist of 103 traditional homes on 16,200 square foot lots (90’X180’) and 39 “age targeted” home sites on 9,350 square foot lots (55’X170’). The age targeted homes are proposed to be maintenance free, single level homes with basements, clustered in the Northeast and Northwest corners of the site. Incorporated into the open space will be trails, water treatment/quality basins, wetland restoration and habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Target Markets The Lake Minnetonka area market is a highly elastic market, assisted by being served by the top high school in the state. The west side of the metro is home to several Fortune 500 companies. The landscape elements of the sub-region are very attractive. Mattamy is projecting 3 “target” markets. At present, Mattamy is expecting to build on 89 of the traditional single family lots. The “product line” for these will be as seen in our North Oaks project (Charley Lake Preserve) and our Victoria project (Ambergate). These homes will generally range from $650,000-$900,000. Additionally, Mattamy is proposing to construct 39 “age targeted” homes. These are single level, maintenance free lifestyle homes with a target market consisted of empty nesters that may winter places other than Minnesota. These homes all have full basements with an expected price range from $430,000 - $650,000. We are exploring partnering with one or more custom home builders on the 14 lots on the center cul-de-sac. The builder would address that part of the market that prefers a completely custom home. These homes will likely be $1,000,000+. Utilizing these 3 target markets will cover a broader range of buyers, increase the rate of absorption and provide for housing diversity within the neighborhood. Environmental Considerations Mattamy has performed a tree survey of all trees within the areas proposed to be disturbed. Numerous minor modifications have been made to preserve significant, healthy trees. Street (boulevard) trees are proposed throughout the neighborhood as well as trees for screening purposes and ornamentation. Mattamy includes 2 front yard trees in the base landscape plan for each house. Based on the City’s tree replacement policy, we are replacing nearly twice the number of trees required. The central open space is proposed to be developed with 3 different types of landscape. In areas that abut residential yards, a low-mow or no-mow grass is proposed. This landscape will act as a “less wild” landscape between the manicured yards and the natural, native landscapes proposed to connect the wetland areas and stormwater features. Having a grassy landscape will make the wildlife areas seem more intentional and not just a “bunch of weeds” as described by many. Unless needed to construct storm water treatment facilities, trees in the central open space area will all be preserved. The existing wetlands, replacement wetlands and storm water treatment ponds will all be connected with native prairie vegetation of vegetation suitable for the soils and there existing characteristics. This will provide for a very distinctive look and create corridors for wildlife and other forms of habitat. A public trail will be provided through the open space exposing the users a variety of different landscape experiences including ponds, wetlands, woods and passive open spaces. Mattamy feels that part of this open space area should be set aside for passive recreational activities like throwing Frisbees, neighborhood pick-up games or other spontaneous recreation. The area should be relatively flat and mowed to promote its use. We are aware that the City is not particularly keen on maintenance but the area is relatively small and will not need irrigation. Traffic Considerations Traffic was a topic of considerable discussion during the PAC process. At the conclusion of this process, it was generally agreed that the traffic concerns (Country Club Road corridor, Eureka/ SH 7, Smithtown Rd/CR 19, CR 41/SH 7) were existing issues and that the development of the site with the number of homes proposed would not make the conditions considerably worse. It was also concluded that the golf course site didn’t present any opportunities to correct the problems. Access is proposed from Smithtown Road on the north and Yellowstone Trail to the south. The northern entrance has been moved west to line up between two properties on the north side of Smithtown. This is in response to concerns raised by both the Council and the residents. In accordance with Concept PUD approval, an additional access is proposed on the west side of the site. To minimize wetland impacts, the road is offset west from Fairway Drive by the Code required 125 feet. Pedestrian Circulation Throughout the PAC review, comments were made regarding the desire to build trails along the periphery and interior of the site. Mattamy proposes to address this with the following: 1.Construction of a 6’ wide on west side of the proposed Fairway Drive. This will wind through the neighborhood and connect with the trail system in the central open space, eventually connecting to the proposed trail along the west side of Country Club Road. 2.An off-road trail west of the tree line along Country Club Road. This trail would connect to other trails and sidewalks within the neighborhood and central open space. 3.Sidewalks will be incorporated into the street design as agreed upon by the City and Mattamy. Street Rights of Way/Setbacks We feel that boulevard trees are a necessary element of any neighborhood. We could get lost in the details of controlling street micro-climates but the simple fact is that they make a neighborhood look better. These trees are what differentiate mature cities from newer suburbs where concerns such as reduced snow storage and liability trump traditional neighborhood design. We are proposing street trees at approximately 60’ intervals; closer when the situation merits it. With a 50’ ROW and a 6’ sidewalk, there is only 4’ of boulevard in which to plant these trees. In our opinion this is not enough. As such, we are requesting that all streets that have a sidewalk also have a 60’ ROW. On these streets we would have a 35’ front setback (same distance to street as a 50’ ROW and 40’ setback as originally proposed. The same would hold for side yard setbacks on corner lots. On the age targeted product in the NW corner, setbacks would be increased on the sidewalk side (west side) so that cars don’t overhang the sidewalk. Minimum Setbacks -- Discussion Minimum setbacks are shown on the plans submitted with our proposal but it’s important to point out certain realities of our design. We measure side setbacks all the way through the lot pad (house) and design the lot accordingly. For example, on a pie-shaped lot (narrower in the front), the critical measurement is taken at the front setback. Since the lot lines diverge going to the rear, the setback increases. Conversely, if the pie shape is wider at the street, the critical dimension is at the back of the pad (house). This then creates a side setback at the front of the house that is substantially more than the minimum. This is one reason that neighborhoods with curvilinear streets look better – the side setbacks are in fact varied. This particularly important with the age targeted neighborhoods where concerns have been voiced about the 7.5’ side setback. We will be preparing drawings of these neighborhoods using real floorplans and minimum setbacks to illustrate what a difference this can make. In most cases, the front sideyard setback is 10’ or greater. In areas that abut existing residences, the street is curved in the reverse direction to create sideyard setbacks at the rear of the home that are greater than the proposed minimum and in many cases greater than the normal 10’. Homeowners Association There will be a Master Association to cover development maintenance and a Sub-association to cover snow plowing and yard maintenance in the age targeted neighborhood. The Master Association will cover items such as the entrance monuments, landscaped medians, street trees and any common open spaces. The Sub Association will deal primarily with the yard maintenance and snow plowing in the age targeted neighborhoods. All units will belong to the Master Association. Historical Reference It is our intent to keep Minnetonka Country Club as the name of the neighborhood. While it is no longer a country club, the club has been a fixture in Shorewood and the Lake Minnetonka area for a century. It makes sense to retain the name. Streets are named after old types of golf clubs, the name of the course where the first golf tournament was played, and the city in which it occurred. We are researching the materials of the initial entrance monument to design something reflecting what people saw decades ago. The central “loop” in the middle of the site will contain a neighborhood green (a park, not a golf green) around which we will be transplanting trees from the golf course that had been planted as memorials to deceased members or important events. We are working with the Witracks to come up with a name for the “green” that will have some historical significance, possibly after their father. While the look for the area will change considerably, bits and pieces of history are nice to leave behind. Going Forward It is our intention to obtain preliminary approvals early in 2016. After obtaining these approvals, we would proceed to prepare final plans and obtain other State and local permits in hopes of placing heavy equipment on-site before road restrictions and in anticipation of a Spring start. Weather permitting (combined with a little luck) we would start our models beginning in October with a grand opening and VIP event (people who have been put on our waiting list) near the Spring 2017 Parade of Homes. SEE SHEET 3 OF 18 SHEETS R Know what's MATTAMY HOMES 3890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100 2 CERTIFICATION Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB C# Drawn: Blaine, MN 55014 environmental Iherebycertifythatthissurvey,planorreport EXISTING CONDITIONS 7201 Washington Avenue - Suite 201 of Phone: (763) 489-7900 Signature: engineering waspreparedbymeorundermydirect 933 File No: Shorewood, Minnesota Fax: (763) 489-7959 18 supervisionandthatIamadulyLicensedLand surveying Edina, Minnesota, 55439 Date:10/30/2015License #:40361Date:10/30/2015 Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. www.carlsonmccain.com Save Date:11/02/15f:\jobs\5401 - 5420\5411 - minnetonka country club\cad\survey\prel. plat\5411_excon.dwg SEE SHEET 2 OF 18 SHEETS R Know what's MATTAMY HOMES 3890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100 3 CERTIFICATION Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB C# Drawn: Blaine, MN 55014 environmental Iherebycertifythatthissurvey,planorreport EXISTING CONDITIONS 7201 Washington Avenue - Suite 201 of Phone: (763) 489-7900 Signature: engineering waspreparedbymeorundermydirect 933 File No: Shorewood, Minnesota Fax: (763) 489-7959 18 supervisionandthatIamadulyLicensedLand surveying Edina, Minnesota, 55439 Date:10/30/2015License #:40361Date:10/30/2015 Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. www.carlsonmccain.com Save Date:11/02/15f:\jobs\5401 - 5420\5411 - minnetonka country club\cad\survey\prel. plat\5411_excon.dwg MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB SEE SHEET 5 OF 18 SHEETS SEE SHEET 6 OF 18 SHEETS R Know what's MATTAMY HOMES 3890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100 4 CERTIFICATION Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff PRELIMINARY PLAT MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB JAB Drawn: Blaine, MN 55014 environmental Iherebycertifythatthissurvey,planorreport 7201 Washington Avenue - Suite 201 of Phone: (763) 489-7900 Signature: engineering waspreparedbymeorundermydirect 933 File No: INDEX SHEET Shorewood, Minnesota Fax: (763) 489-7959 18 supervisionandthatIamadulyLicensedLand surveying Edina, Minnesota, 55439 Date:10/30/2015License #:40361Date:10/30/2015 Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. www.carlsonmccain.com Save Date:11/02/15f:\jobs\5401 - 5420\5411 - minnetonka country club\cad\survey\prel. plat\5411_prp-cover.dwg MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB SEE SHEET 6 OF 18 SHEETSSEE SHEET 6 OF 18 SHEETS R Know what's MATTAMY HOMES 3890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100 5 CERTIFICATION Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB JAB Drawn: Blaine, MN 55014 environmental Iherebycertifythatthissurvey,planorreport PRELIMINARY PLAT 7201 Washington Avenue - Suite 201 of Phone: (763) 489-7900 Signature: engineering waspreparedbymeorundermydirect 933 File No: Shorewood, Minnesota Fax: (763) 489-7959 18 supervisionandthatIamadulyLicensedLand surveying Edina, Minnesota, 55439 Date:10/30/2015License #:40361Date:10/30/2015 Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. www.carlsonmccain.com Save Date:11/02/15f:\jobs\5401 - 5420\5411 - minnetonka country club\cad\survey\prel. plat\5411_prp.dwg MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB SEE SHEET 5 OF 18 SHEETS R Know what's MATTAMY HOMES 3890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100 6 CERTIFICATION Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB JAB Drawn: Blaine, MN 55014 environmental Iherebycertifythatthissurvey,planorreport PRELIMINARY PLAT 7201 Washington Avenue - Suite 201 of Phone: (763) 489-7900 Signature: engineering waspreparedbymeorundermydirect 933 File No: Shorewood, Minnesota Fax: (763) 489-7959 18 supervisionandthatIamadulyLicensedLand surveying Edina, Minnesota, 55439 Date:10/30/2015License #:40361Date:10/30/2015 Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. www.carlsonmccain.com Save Date:11/02/15f:\jobs\5401 - 5420\5411 - minnetonka country club\cad\survey\prel. plat\5411_prp.dwg