081115 Park Comm Agenda
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2015 7:00 P.M.
AGENDA
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
A. Roll Call
Hartmann(April)____
Mangold(June)____
Dietz(July) ____
Vassar_____
Stelmachers(May) ____
B. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of May 12, 2015 – (Att.-#2A)
B. Park Commission Tours of June 9, 2015 - (Att.-#2B)
C. Park Commission Tours of July 14, 2015 - (Att.-#2C)
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
4. MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW (PARK
DEDICATION) -
(Att.-#4)
5. FREEMAN PARK MEMORIAL PLAQUE -
(Att.-#5)
6. FOLLOW-UP OF PARK TOURS
7. SCHEDULE JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL
8. PREPARATION FOR JOINT MEETING WITH CHANHASSEN ON
CATHCART PARK
-(Att.-#8)
9. DETERMINE LIAISONS FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS -
(Att.-#9)
10. NEW BUSINESS
11. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS/UPDATES
(Staff reports and updates are not meant for discussion. Discussion items will be listed
as part of new or old business.)
A. City Council
B. Staff
12. ADJOURN
Liaison for City Council Meeting on August 24 is Commissioner
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
#2A
PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
TUESDAY, MAY 12, 2015 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
Chair Mangold convened the meeting at 7:07 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Present: Chair Mangold, Commissioners Hartmann, Dietz (arrived at 7:10 p.m.),
Stelmachers; City Planner Nielsen
Absent: Vassar
B. Review Agenda
Commissioner Hartmann moved to approve the agenda as presented. Commissioner
Stelmachers seconded the motion. Motion carried 3-0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of April 14, 2015.
Commissioner Stelmachers moved to approve the minutes of the April 14, 2015 meeting as
written. Commissioner Hartmann seconded the motion. Motion carried 3-0.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were none.
4. PRESENTATION BY ATTORNEY KEANE ON OPEN MEETING LAW
Postponed to August meeting.
5. OPTIONS REGARDING HOCKEY RINK AT FREEMAN
Nielsen gave a short history of the hockey rink at Badger and plan to move it from the park to a
different location. He discussed possible locations at Freeman Park.
Nielsen discussed the option to go with a smaller rink at Freeman. He stated a 120 x 60 ft. rink
would fit well in the parking lot area. He discussed the use of portable boards and storage would
be at the Public Works Building during the off season. He discussed modifications to Eddy
Station to make the warming house more usable. He asked the Commission for further direction
and whether bids should be pursued for the hockey rink at Freeman Park.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, MAY 12, 2015
3
PAGE 2 OF
Mangold asked if there would still be fencing or net ends. Nielsen stated we would be looking at
net ends. He noted little kids could still play two games cross-wise on the smaller rink. He
believed this is a good solution based on everything we’ve heard so far.
Mangold stated grading would be done by Public Works as well as the board installation. The big
question is lighting. Nielsen stated the lighting would serve a double purpose as parking lot
lighting. Mangold asked if there would be lighting for a free skating area outside of the rink.
Nielsen asked where there would be free skating. Mangold stated it would be north of Eddy
Station. Nielsen stated he didn’t recall being a part of that discussion.
Dietz asked how many people could fit in Eddy Station. Nielsen stated it is every bit as big as
Badger Park.
Stelmachers asked if the work needed in Eddy Station should be included in the bid. Nielsen
indicated it would. Mangold stated he would like to see the building inside when the park tour is
taking place.
Commissioner Stelmachers moved to bid out the hockey structure, grading, and lighting
options, and modifications to Eddy Station. Commissioner Hartmann seconded the
motion. Motion carried 4-0.
6. COMMUNITY GARDENS – LAYOUT AND COST ESTIMATES FOR WATER
Nielsen stated a bid has been received on the work on the water. A yard hydrant will be added at
a cost of $8300.
Mangold asked how many plots are at the garden and how many more are proposed for an
expansion. Hartmann noted two people were sent to the skate park site. Mangold believed it is a
lot of money for just a few plots.
Stelmachers asked if the bid is in line with what was supplied at the skate park. Nielsen stated it
is.
Dietz stated there is room for garden plot expansion at Freeman Park. He stated there is value in
having water where the people want to be. Stelmachers stated once there is water, there will be a
greater demand to rent garden plots.
Commissioner Dietz moved to recommend moving forward with providing water at
Freeman Park. Commissioner Stelmachers seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0.
7. NEW BUSINESS
Nielsen reviewed a proposed concept plan for the Minnetonka Country Club property. He
discussed options for a baseball field and tennis courts at this site and Badger Park.
Commissioners and Nielsen discussed land uses on the site, wetland designations and locations,
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, MAY 12, 2015
3
PAGE 3 OF
rezoning, land development, lot sizes, and when the Park Commission will be able to give input
on this development.
Nielsen discussed park dedication and proposed trails on the site. A possible loop trail could be
constructed. Commissioners and Nielsen discussed traffic which will be generated as a result of
this development.
Nielsen discussed a call he received regarding signage in Freeman Park. A number of people
complain about the signage not indicating what kind of fields they are being directed to. They
believe the signage should give more direction such as indicating soccer fields one way, ball fields
another way. Hartmann agreed the signage should be changed. Dietz stated he would like to see
what the cost of the signage is. Hartmann suggested one sign on one side of the road. Nielsen
stated he would lay out a proposed sign and talk about it at a future meeting. Mangold stated the
signs should also be reviewed at the park tour.
8. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS/UPDATES
A. City Council
Nielsen updated the Commission on recent City Council actions.
B. Staff
None
9. ADJOURN
Stelmachers moved, Hartmann seconded, to adjourn the Park Commission Meeting of May
12, 2015 at 8:11 p.m. Motion carried.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Clare T. Link
Recorder
#2B
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
PARK TOUR MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
TUESDAY, JUNE 9, 2015
MINUTES
PARK TOUR
The Commission met at Manor Park at approximately 6:30 pm for the tour of City parks. Chair Mangold,
Commissioners Gooch-Hartmann, Stelmachers, and Vassar, Council Liaison Siakel, Planning Director
Nielsen and Public Works Director Brown were present. Commissioner Dietz arrived later during the
tours.
1. FREEMAN PARK
New Gutters on Eddy
Eddy Station - Partition Wall
Water Fountain - Paint Box
Sidewalk Around Little League Concession
Satellite Location (Near Garden) - See Deb Siakel
Warning Track on Field 4
2. CATHCART PARK
Mowing - Chanhassen is Supposed to - Joint Meeting
Clover Patches - Signs
Swing Sets - More Mulch
Parking
3. CRESCENT BEACH
Paint Box
4. CHRISTMAS LAKE ACCESS
Clean up after treatment
5. BADGER PARK
The Commission adjourned the tour at 8:05 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Brad Nielsen
Planning Director
#2C
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
PARK TOUR MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2015
MINUTES
PARK TOUR
The Commission met at Manor Park at approximately 6:30 pm for the tour of City parks. Chair Mangold,
Commissioners Gooch-Hartmann, Dietz, Stelmachers, and Vassar, Council Liaison Siakel, Planning
Director Nielsen and Public Works Director Brown were present.
1. MANOR PARK
Sign / map for mile markers
Drainage east of play equipment
Pond - Water quality
2. SKATE PARK
Replace / repair panels as needed on ramps
Expand garden
3. SILVERWOOD PARK
4. CHRISTMAS LAKE ACCESS
Clean up after treatment
5. GIDEON GLEN
Parking lot is under construction
Park Commissioner Stelmachers motioned and Gooch-Hartmann seconded to approve the
installation of fencing at Freeman Park community garden and South Shore community garden.
Motion Carrried.
The Commission adjourned the tour at 8:05 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Brad Nielsen
Planning Director
#4
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD • SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331
Phone: (952) 960-7900 • FAX: (952) 474-0128 • Email: planning@ci.shorewood.mn.us
PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE INSPECTIONS
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Park Commission
FROM:
Brad Nielsen
DATE:
6 August 2015
RE:
Minnetonka Country Club Redevelopment – Park Dedication
FILE NO.
405 (15.11)
Attached is the background material relative to the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) redevelopment
project. As we have mentioned in the past few months, the issue of whether additional park land should
be required from the project was addressed by the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC). The PAC, in
looking at areas adjoining the golf course property, considered the possibility of building senior housing
on part of Badger Park and relocating certain facilities to the MCC site. The PAC’s consensus
conclusion was that Badger should remain intact, but nothing prevented redevelopment along the north
side of the park for senior housing. It is worth noting that Park Commissioners Mangold and Dietz
participated in the PAC study.
The PAC’s conclusion was consistent with the current Shorewood Comprehensive Plan, which
recommends focusing on development of existing park land rather than acquisition of new property.
This is also supported by the Capital Improvement Plan for parks, which projects funding deficiencies
for park improvements in coming years.
As you are aware, new development is required to dedicate either land, or cash, or some combination of
land and cash toward the community’s park system. Although the PAC recommendation was not to
acquire additional park land, they expressed a strong preference that the open space in the project be
available for public use vs. private use. This also works better for the proposed internal trail system
within the project that is proposed to be available for public use. It should be noted that state statutes
provide that some credit must be given to the developer for public open space as well as park land.
As far as a recommendation from the Park Commission, the Commission should determine if it is
agreement with the PAC conclusions. If so, park dedication fees will be negotiated in the Development
Stage part of the project review process. It would also be useful for the Park Commission to provide
its opinion as to whether the open space in the project should be public or private.
If you have any questions relative to any of the material please do not hesitate to contact me prior to
Tuesday night’s meeting.
Cc: Bill Joynes
Tim Keane
Bruce DeJong
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka’s South Shore
Memorandum
Re: MCC Redevelopment – Comp Plan Amendment and Concept Stage Plan
29 July 2015
2015 (see Attachment I). The recommendations of the PAC will be referenced in various aspects
of this report.
The developer has now submitted applications for a formal Comprehensive Plan amendment and a
Concept Plan for a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.). As part of his applications, the
developer has provided the following exhibits:
D-3 Site Conditions – Soils, Wetlands and Drainage
D-4 Site Conditions – Tree Massings
D-5 Aerial View
D-6 Proposed Concept Plan
D-7 Overall Site Plan
E Examples – Building Setbacks
F Applicant’s Traffic Consultant Report
The Minnetonka Country Club golf course, including clubhouse and maintenance facilities, driving
range and tennis facilities, currently occupy the site (see Exhibt C). As can be seen on Exhibit D-
3, the topography of the property is rolling, with elevations as high as 999 near the existing
clubhouse, dropping to as low as 956 in the southerly low flat areas.
Land use and zoning surrounding the site are as follows:
North: single-family homes, zoned R-1A and R-1C (across Smithtown Road); plus
commercial development, zoned C-1, General Commercial (Smithtown
Crossing Redevelopment Area)
East: commercial development, zoned C-1; public (City Hall/Badger Park) and
single-family homes, zoned R-1C and R-1A
South: single-family homes, zoned R-1C and R-1A
West: single-family homes, zoned R-1A
As mentioned in the applicant’s narrative, 100 of the proposed homes would be built on lots with
minimum sizes of 90’ x 180’ and a minimum area of 16,200 square feet. The remaining 40 homes
would be on smaller lots – 55’ x 135’ with a minimum of 7500 square feet of area.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
As mentioned earlier in this report, a considerable amount of work was done, and
recommendations were made by the Planning Advisory Committee. The Committee’s findings
and conclusions, along with the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code provide the
basis for evaluating the Mattamy proposal and will be referenced throughout this report.
-2-
Memorandum
Re: MCC Redevelopment – Comp Plan Amendment and Concept Stage Plan
29 July 2015
A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
1. Proposed Land Use/Density.
The applicant’s proposal necessitates a change in the Proposed Land Use Plan in
Shorewood’s Comprehensive Plan from “Semi-Public” to “Low Density
“Residential (1-2 units per acre)”. Shorewood’s Zoning Code prescribes that
density be expressed in “units per 40,000 square feet”. The calculation is based on
net density. That is, the net area of the property, exclusive of city-designated
wetlands, and public right-of-way, divided by 40,000, divided by 140 units.
Following is the calculation:
Net area: 118.64 ac. – 13.6* ac. = 105.4*ac.
Square feet: 105.4 x 43,560 sq. ft. = 4,575,542 sq. ft.
“Shorewood acre” 4,575,542 ÷ 40.000 = 114.39 (Shwd. ac.)
Net density: 140 units ÷ 114.39 = 1.22 units/40,000 sq. ft.
*Does not include city-designated wetlands
There is a relatively small area of city-designated wetlands (as opposed to Wetland
Conservation Act wetlands) in the northwest corner of the site. Since the area of
city-designated wetlands has not been deducted from the gross area, the resulting
net density will be somewhat higher than 1.22 u/40,000. Nevertheless, this
density is very close to the bottom of the 1-2 units/40,000 square-foot range.
It is worth noting that the applicant’s pre-application plans proposed 121 units, all
single-family residential, primarily one line of home product. Based on input from
the PAC, the developer replaced 21 of the lots with 40 smaller “age-targeted”
units in the northwest and northeast corners of the site. These are intended for
empty nesters and seniors who wish to scale down their housing in smaller,
maintenance-free homes. The proposed units are single-level, plus a basement,
built on 7500 square-foot lots.
In addition, the applicant is exploring the possibility of bringing in a separate
builder for the cul-de-sac units in the middle of the site. While the project remains
entirely single-family residential, it addresses three different demographic markets.
Part of the work of the PAC included an examination of the areas surrounding the
subject property, particularly the area to the north and east of the site. The group
-3-
Memorandum
Re: MCC Redevelopment – Comp Plan Amendment and Concept Stage Plan
29 July 2015
considered whether these areas, including Badger Park, might be appropriate for
some sort of more diverse uses, such as commercial, or higher density residential.
With respect to Badger Park, the group concluded that the park should remain
intact and that existing recreational facilities should not be relocated to the MCC
site. This does not preclude, however, some sort of senior housing in the
southeast quadrant of the Smithtown Road/County Road 19 intersection. Such a
use could relate well and make use of the park and the Shorewood Community
Center. Similarly, the northwest quadrant could accommodate a senior housing
development. It is interesting that the PAC came to the same basic conclusions as
the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study, which has already been adopted by
reference into the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan. Some of the more detailed
recommendations of the PAC which proposed entry treatment for the area and
streetscaping are consistent with the County Road 19 Corridor Study, which has
also been adopted into the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Traffic.
One of the key issues identified early on in the pre-application process is traffic.
While the PAC concluded that the difference in traffic generated by the proposed
project and an active, viable country club was relatively minimal, it acknowledged
that area traffic is an existing, ongoing issue, particularly along the Country
Club/Yellowstone/Lake Linden collector route. The City Council has agreed that
this is an existing issue irrespective of the proposed development. In response, the
Council has directed staff to establish a separate resident committee to do a
detailed study of alternatives for Country Club/Yellowstone/Lake Linden. This
study would run in parallel with the Country Club redevelopment process.
Findings of the study may also be used in a more comprehensive city-wide traffic
policy.
3. Metropolitan Council Review.
Just as Shorewood’s Comprehensive Plan was subject to review by the
Metropolitan Council and surrounding communities, the amendment is also subject
to review. Upon completion of the public hearing at the Planning Commission
level, staff will forward the proposed amendment to the Met Council for
determination as to the “metropolitan significance”, if any, of the project. More on
that process will be presented at the public hearing.
B.Planned Unit Development.
-4-
Memorandum
Re: MCC Redevelopment – Comp Plan Amendment and Concept Stage Plan
29 July 2015
1. Rezoning.
The current Comprehensive Plan and the conclusions of the PAC support the use
of Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) as the appropriate zoning tool for the
redevelopment of this significant part of future Shorewood. Rather than a
traditional zoning approach, the establishment of a P.U.D. district on the MCC
property provides for greater flexibility and control of the redevelopment. The
Planning Commission and City Council are urged to review Section 1201.25 Subd.
1. of the Zoning Code for a detailed explanation of the purpose of P.U.D.
With respect to flexibility, this provides for the main premise of the proposal,
which is to cluster home sites on the better, more buildable ground while
preserving natural features of the site, such as wetlands, trees and areas with less
suitable soils. The development agreement that results from the P.U.D. establishes
the standards for the site and actually becomes the zoning code for the subject
property. By using P.U.D. the city can accommodate the varying housing options
proposed by the applicant.
The logistics and mechanics for managing common and private open space are
contained in the P.U.D. provisions. In addition, unlike conventional zoning, if a
project fails or defaults, zoning of the site reverts back to the current R-1A zoning.
With traditional zoning, once the property is rezoned, it is very difficult to change
it back.
2. Concept Plan.
The P.U.D. process includes three distinct steps and applications: 1) concept stage;
2) development stage; and 3) final plan stage. The applicant has requested
approval of his concept plan as shown in Exhibits D-6 and D-7. The basic
elements of community development set forth in the Shorewood Comprehensive
Plan and in the work of the PAC - natural resources, land use, transportation,
community facilities and housing - should be considered in evaluating the concept
plan.
a. Natural Resources. An important aspect of the proposed concept plan is
setting aside the low areas with soils less desirable for building sites as
open space. Preservation of those areas also provides for better protection
of trees on the site. What needs to be decided is whether the open space is
to be privately owned and maintained, or whether it should be public.
While all developments are required under Shorewood’s development
regulations to protect wetlands, there is actually some potential on this site
-5-
Memorandum
Re: MCC Redevelopment – Comp Plan Amendment and Concept Stage Plan
29 July 2015
for the restoration of a very old wetland area that existed before the
property was ever used as a golf course. The PAC recommended that a
larger, well designed wetland is preferable, if feasible, to having several
small “pocket” wetlands. This raises a question as to who designs the
wetland, builds it, and maintains it. This issue will be addressed within the
development stage of the P.U.D. process.
b. Land Use. The answer to the basic land use question is quite simple – the
project is entirely single-family residential which is quite consistent with the
surrounding areas. Somewhat more complicated is how to craft
development standards for the proposed lots that provide for relatively
large homes on smaller lots than typically found in Shorewood.
This question was posed to the applicant in the PAC review, specifically,
how would the homes fit, and what about future accessory uses such as
decks, patios and swimming pools? The response came in the form of
illustrative sketches for the various models of homes they intend to build
(see Exhibit E for examples). Staff is convinced that the homes and
accessory uses will fit, particularly since the lots have been deepened
somewhat since the first proposal. This also eliminated the question of
what to do with some of the “orphaned open spaces” on the original plan.
Shorewood imposes hardcover (impervious surface) restrictions for all
property in the city. Properties in the Shoreland District are limited to 25
percent, while all others are limited to 33 percent. Given the size of the
proposed homes and anticipated accessory uses, and the smaller lot sizes, a
different standard may be needed for the project. With the amount of open
space proposed for the site, this should not be a problem.
c. Transportation/Traffic. While overall area traffic will be addressed under a
separate study, there are two issues within the project that deserve
attention: 1) streets; and 2) trails. The most significant issue relative to
streets is the need for an additional access to Smithtown Road. A second
access would resolve the excessive cul-de-sac length on the west side of
the site plan. It is also consistent with trying to encourage project traffic to
use Smithtown/County Road 19 rather than Country
Club/Yellowstone/Lake Linden. The apparent solution is an extension of
the cul-de-sac street in the northwest corner of the site. Although it
necessitates some wetland alteration, there is ample room within the
project to mitigate the wetland loss.
-6-
Memorandum
Re: MCC Redevelopment – Comp Plan Amendment and Concept Stage Plan
29 July 2015
At the informal open house held on 28 July, some residents expressed
concern about the southerly entrance to the project coming out on
Yellowstone Trail. An un-named Planning Commissioner suggested that
having one of the cul-de-sacs on the east side of the project punched
through to Country Club Road may encourage some more of the project
traffic toward the County Road 19 intersection. This is worth exploring
with city engineers, but it is suggested it be reviewed as part of the
upcoming Country Club/Yellowstone/Lake Linden study.
It has been noted that inadequate street right-of-way exists along certain
sections of existing streets, i.e. Smithtown Road and Country Club Road.
As the project moves to development stage review, the preliminary plat
should address these deficiencies.
Per recommendations by the PAC, the applicant shows a trail along the
east side of the project, just outside the west side of the Country Club
Road R.O.W. (see Exhibit D-7). This is consistent with the Shorewood
Trail Plan and the preference of the PAC. The applicant also shows a
perimeter/internal trail system. Although the ownership and maintenance
of the internal trail system have yet to be determined, the preference of the
PAC and staff are for this to be public.
d. Community Facilities. This element covers parks and public utilities.
(1) Parks. The PAC did not recommend moving any of the Badger Park
facilities to the proposed project area. As such, the issue simply
becomes what amount of park dedication will be required. The
Shorewood Subdivision Code prescribes park dedication fees of
$6500 per lot. As an alternative, the City can require up to eight
percent of the land in the project or cash in the amount of eight
percent of the raw value of the land. While this is the City’s
determination to make, the City Attorney advises that the statutes
provide for some credit to be given for things such as open space or
trails. This will be negotiated with the developer as the project
progresses.
(2) City Water. The project will be served by the municipal water
system. At present, Shorewood imposes a $10,000 connection fee
per lot, from which the developer may deduct his cost of water main
construction, service stubs, etc.
-7-
Memorandum
Re: MCC Redevelopment – Comp Plan Amendment and Concept Stage Plan
29 July 2015
(3) Sanitary and Storm Sewer. These items will be addressed under
separate cover by the City Engineer. That said, it is important to
remember that storm water management was the second most
significant issue raised in the pre-application review.
RECOMMENDATION
In general, the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and Concept Stage plan appear to be
consistent with the recommendations of the Planning Advisory Committee. As you are aware, we
held an informal open house meeting last Tuesday, inviting over 700 area residents to come and
familiarize themselves with the project and the process to date. The meeting was well attended
and many of the attendees filled out comment sheets, which we have boiled down in Attachment
II. There will undoubtedly be considerable interest in the redevelopment project at the public
hearing scheduled for next Tuesday. As such, the Commission may wish to not make a decision
the night of the hearing. Staff mentioned in the pre-application review meeting that additional
meetings may be required to comply with 60-day rule requirements.
If the Commission wishes to continue the discussion it should be scheduled for review at a
meeting on Tuesday, 18 August.
Cc: Bill Joynes
Tim Keane
Bruce DeJong
Paul Hornby
Larry Brown
Rick Packer
-8-
Lake Minnetonka
Upper Lake
• �..�M rshr +
Ct
C) >� •tea
• 9� Yy
y
Q Rd
�z
^ Beverly.Dr
CD W 62
P�
C
0 500 1,000 2,000
FM — Feet
Shorewood Planning Department
11/2014
CI3'Y OF SHOREWOOD
o • + + +
Valie y_W..opd,La `
Nelsine,Dr
sac 3 Sunn ale
• • o.
�a q La
m
�
1n 1A t
Freeman Park
Gideon Bay
;k Frog
ad Island
U Rla' a Pdint
3 j J Cir
Minnetonka
Country Club i 0��a� • c
er
_ o NV
UI
o�
y 5 a Rampart A
�o ` food Dr it
d.
Park Lane
Pond View Dr
(Lake Minnewashta)
�a
a9r
C
Minne
CITY 07-
July 6, 2015
FILE C Mattamy Homes
i nneapolis- St.Paul Division
7201 Washington Avenue South, Suite 201, Edina, MIS! 55439
T (952) 898 -2100
www.mattamyhomes.com
Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concept PUD Plan (General) Narrative
Minnetonka Country Club
Shorewood, MN
Request
Mattamy Minneapolis, LLC (Applicant) has entered into a Purchase Agreement with Minnetonka
Country Club Association, Inc. (Owner) for the purchase of the Minnetonka Country Club in
Shorewood, Minnesota. The proposed purchase contemplates development of the site for single
family residential purposes in accordance with the recently accepted Planning Advisory Committee
recommendations. Mattamy is requesting a change in the Comprehensive Plan from Semi - Public to
Low Density Residential and approval of the Concept PUD General Plan.
u; 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 to the proposed sidewalk on Smithtown
Road, and will create a trail corridor along the west,side of the trees that line Country Club Road. On
a previous rendition of this plan, there were considerable private open space areas surrounding the
neighborhood, creating distance between the new homes and the existing neighborhood. Because
of the difficulty in maintaining all these "orphan" areas, they have been incorporated into the
proposed lots. Nothing has been brought any closer to the existing neighborhood; the previously
proposed open space has simply been incorporated into the proposed lots
Proposed Concept Plan
Concept Objective
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 140 proposed home sites on the higher areas of
the site. The home sites will consist of 100 traditional homes on 16,200 square foot lots
(90'X180') and 40 "age targeted" home sites on 7,150 square foot lots (55'X130'). 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
Exhibit B
MATTAMY PROJECT NARRATIVE
CHARLOTTE • JACKSONVILLE . MINNEAPOLIS • ORLANDO - PHOENIX • SARASOTA
<.Y
Mattamy Homes
Minneapolis -St. Paul Division
wildlife species. Ultimately, a PUD process will likely be undertaken for final development
approvals.
Target Market
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 86 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 40 "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.
We are exploring partnering with a custom home builder on the 14 lots on the center cul -de -sac.
,"he 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 s
It is Mattamy's desire, as shown by the Concept Plan, to save as many trees and existing natural
areas as possible around the periphery of the site. No wetland impacts or tree removal are
currently proposed in the central open space. During the PAC process, there was considerable
discussion regarding wetland restoration. The central open space is well suited for this and
ample space exists. Additionally, significant areas exist within the open area to plant vegetation
friendly to a variety of insect and animal wildlife. Water quality standards will be dictated by the
Minnehaha Watershed District. There is currently a deteriorated drain the system that runs from
the SW corner of the site to Lake Minnewashta. This system will be improved as part of the
Mattamy proposal.
Mattamy is currently preforming a tree survey of all trees within 200' of the proposed centerline
in order to further evaluate the proposed lot layout and grading plan.
Mattamy Homes
Minneapolis -St. Paul Division
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.
Mattamy retained a separate traffic consultant who reviewed Stantec's work and has issued a
Tech Memo stating that they confirm the approach and agree with the results. It is expected that
the proposed development may present opportunities to provide pedestrian safety along
Country Club Road and Smithtown Road. This is discussed with "Pedestrian Circulation" below.
Access is proposed from Smithtown Road on the north and Yellowstone Trail to the south. During
the PAC process it was noted that the west 1/3 of the property was served with only one access;
it was recommended that providing another access should be considered along with the
redevelopment of the 12 properties between Smithtown Road and the Minnetonka Country Club.
While Mattamy believes this to be, in concept, a reasonable idea, we believe the redevelopment
of the north property into a higher density use presents problems due to the configuration of the
land and the difficulty involved to assemble 12 properties without public subsidy. The acquisition
price alone of the 12 properties comes very close to the retail value of the lots if the property
could be developed at 3 units an acre. After exploring the redevelopment potential of the area,
Mattamy has concluded that a more likely redevelopment scenario is that the properties will,
over time, be acquired as "tear- downs" with upper -end homes subsequently built on then. It
would be anyone's guess as to where to "point" a stub street at the area suggested as being
redeveloped.
If wetland impacts were contemplated, an access could be built to Smithtown Road in the
northwest corner of the site to line up with Fairway Drive to the north of Smithtown. Mattamy
believes that a preferable option would be to install an emergency vehicle access (through the
20' wide non - wetland strip that currently serves as a back access to the MCC property) that will
double as a trailhead to the trail system that will wind through the central open space, eventually
connecting to Country Club Road and Badger Park.
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. Participation in the sidewalk improvement project along Smithtown Road
Mattamy Homes
Minneapolis -St. Paul Division
2. Construction of a trailhead on Smithtown Road south of Fairway Drive. This trail
would wind through the neighborhood with the primary focus on the central open
space, connecting to the proposed trail along the west side of Country Club Road.
3. 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.
4. Sidewalks will be incorporated into the street design as agreed upon by the City and
Mattamy.
Site Data
The Site Data is as follows:
Gross Site Area: 118.64 acres
Existing Wetlands (to remain) 5.57 acres
ROW (extern
ble Area:
2.45 acres
111.9 acres
ROW (internal) 11.15
Total Open Space: -50.0 acres
(includes Wetlands, Ponding, Wetland Restoration /Raingardens, Tree Preservation, Wetland Buffers, Screening Buffers, & misc. open spaces)
Total Lot Area: 55.04 acres
Proposed Single Fam. Lots: 140 home sites
90' wide x 180' deep typ. 100 lots
55' wide x 135' deep typ. 40 lots
Proposed Single Family Standards:
Traditional
Proposed Lot Size:
16,200 sf (min)
Front Setback:
40' min.
Side Setback:
10'/10' (20' total)
Side Corner Setbacks:
40' min.
Rear Setbacks:
50' min
Age Targeted
Proposed Lot Size: 7,425 sf (min)
Front Setback: 25'
Side Setback: 7.7'/7.5' (15' total)
Side Corner Setbacks: 25'
Rear: 30'
Mattamy Homes
Minneapolis -5t. Paul Division
Going Forward
Mattamy continues to perform site investigations on the property. We have currently staked the proposed
centerline of the streets with estimated cuts and fills to determine locations that will require the least
amount of site disruption. Additionally, we have located all significant trees within 200' either side of the
proposed centerline to further refine grading assumptions and determine road and lot layout. We will
continue to refine the layout in an effort to preserve as much of the site and it's natural characteristics as
possible.
While the best plans are often laid to waste, it would be our desire to put ourselves in a position where we
could perform demolition of the clubhouse and buildings in August and removal of the contaminated soils
over the winter to lessen the impact on the surrounding community. We are aware that a lot of things need
to go right for this to happen, but we remain optimistic.
Professional Consultants
Land Planner
Westwood Professional Services
7699 Anagram Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Engineering and Survey
Carlson and McCain
248 Apollo Drive, Suite 100
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Environmental
Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company
26105 Wild Rose Lane
Shorewood, MN 55331
Soils
Haugo GeoTechnical
2825 Cedar Ave South
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Legal
Winthrop and Weinstine
Capella Tower, Suite 3500
225 S 6th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Transportation Planning
Spack Consulting
PO Box 16269
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Mattamy Homes
Minneapolis -St. Paul Division
a,
L
s
Go' ��'�- -1, `�.- ^�° � �� O
+
y
w
A „ 1 , r i� -� -r DI
3 ' ^� V V �V �,..I
r
1 V
I I .�a I i z' __ '"'� ___ —__— � s•,! �!�g� I, I As ��,.�,�,] 1tg
I y I 0 r4 i pi OG� a�� I _I 1 NY`sY T� g ZO F- i F .1,1 1 i J I I ow.ra u.0
r o'e I e� I °�.� wrvrB• P° o'n b `' C, TTT / / / sQ -I 1.. sm�. a.'.
cL Sw• U
� s �� �� I z u I ' _ f— V J � {��` /; is w -..�r
_.: oeT�n n• q4� "� -
I
i�g (sm Snuf l e)Y 9, 'A
^.' SBB74'S0•E 1 Dwxrz / /- } /,;[,f l/! v
1 xedv i 09 w - 5867 �'S0•E ' _ _ — _ JR97i 'S6•E ' 47 .96 uNOA cr AL I ( /ll / /�Tlf�
J2809� /.�__— 0 i__— _ " I %D:.vN)z lwpr, 4 Jf Fiii�jl I
r+.• re , ter- , — J
730.36 : !J• - -�_
tC�` *�� ✓r I ROAD
Lim b A-
i,°+zr,�� d � '•Sy 'C a °" a ai +I'a S M€ 1 `� ` `. r J �3,`t2`, ` 7`� I r .m 6"I � 4 ./r, v ` `r J` mV �/ . � J _ . { ` rG � I' ra.m.�n, .+ w, m °.. . ,,ro, n. ,a.. rn , m,a m .,.mv A,S ,wM Y s , rN , � � A II I - - -nu - .,w a,s s ae+mn .Yr v wu— rrr+t • n , �, r v^ ._ r . m„ . ,o - d 5Y 1n 981 a. iJ� '- I I I O^1 < d ,�, 5 , +,I . ] -, ^E W A \ ; I . ; \ mi k °'o, , ,'1i ,'�"' . �''_ - �i", Tr" . r ' �«e�a ") v+u` :�r r . , ° ", 6-'ar"nµ "a°v ' , ro. n u r ,xs, + . •�' « / r 4 i - r
Poo- S .v�]rB i iyiii°a oo+. m .._ `taa I l I o
v II � s e_ we] ° + s— D'r g1 ir✓ I _ I F— ~ - 1425.
. . O DOb'04- — - - - - - - - - 185 0
Mmneron'a Mt yCFub - Cupho°e
- --- - 2437
67593 E rD 3'I4 A
Q I — — —
Mr. v r„ v r
—
h, -
Y 1
l
— -- — — — _nwpra g5•q•E,t,.r..�wa.•i'ma«d Q owxrB
E)(CEPTION
� 6 s
n,
e4J0� -
Q
wcAS °uawi;Lx . cJ
r � L7 °yw.rA
•°', L —
,IFLL.T DOWEYFII PP ern..,m ,p �� PW yll 2.111'BWB
v u —
P. i `1A
- ALI,E AAPYIFR
•= Pm:]]M7Y]rzome I � �'-� /,�' 1 WEIUND \ �\ 1 I
w L
—m
.E
U
L , 1 —
AALx r. Douxz 1 ..�. •-,�— — — —
C)
ow,+u
4� Pro:arinY]]YDau ` / :�
r
L Il
�E.er A. UAL '• :�'F-- ,� -✓// ,5
PoD:]z117zuxB]a i p /'" +,l I l '� „C)o
ci — Npp764ry2_: trw;w� :,st ` P;. » 11� ❑B ` I 5`0' I
03 w- - -. mA w. 4',','�:.� ��,,,P„•�”! � �� j ��� « r...: �. .. ...w< r -r��! �.""� a,. r r a `� �
r
,avAmAx a e �Dm, I `. I _ _ — _ _ J
NATd%NEE NDtlNS (, D T 6 7 _ aw_Arro - 1 I L ____ �1
._ -°') ti. rro � — ______.___ —__ ____-
______
685 47 V � . 5�
77 `., q ncn6.n8+�rm`aiYn 0\ Cm A LOT 55 A - A .s _
— — — — Na ' 7 W - -- gsOB ,$ -{ a Ik �eW �Y � S6• Yy s+'Aa `� o 1
v °f2v' fiii.i. �,� '9's "'''SSSSSTTTTT °j fN I Ali r Tai LNOp," s r ,✓ ' i r
,¢xxcssr Bev. ms awx 4� 1 a m^ j°' ♦r w d ✓+* 1 3 BWi--' ' " I I < V L
Pw:.vun]].,ppzl I I �� rA NAUrrM • O.� ❑7 F'A 1 '
SR. �' §I i"j �+� ® I ! NBg•4 .y..+1 1 '�� qi
I9 %D.ull12 _Y, \ k� 4 q I g Yc mi I ,r! Fi Iwn rte' xsz" 1.1i �� V
CCAZr Ae'S rCrA C�e / e6I IIp ]fll ]].l'Up)) ,1
06it .1
Jan IY,n,VJ LJln lttttt]]]]]J
LEGEND — I ro I n2 I i ❑�
• - Omolm NmnmM Cmnly Mmummt ea noted O Dmol. Mh+ lmema Mmhde - +— r - - DAn.- Undr ..d U.0.ne
t - pmoly, Fwntl Ymummt m
..led D -..10 B..N - •• — - D—t- Untlerg —d Dm WC
O - 0- t. set Iran Pbe• .-Ad — BLS A fll y ❑ •Mn r ✓'. �
$ - Dmolea Llghl Pde c - D.M. D.W. Melm —I— - D•nvlea W°ler M I !n I •�i 8E
O - —t. TO.phme Igm --- > - - ->- - 0... • Smllory surer I y I hji. jr g�� v" / \ ft•` J r.�.
O - D.— Smllorr Mmhde 6 ` �/ \ �z%
•�, D WAR —»— - D 1 Slmn Sewer K ak 3N - d w•.•« v "q .°J / �/
�- - —.. Nlecdlmama Sign mot. 1 r Pd
b' - Dmolm Fla Nydrml
H - pmolee %vetl Entl Secllm
— • — • —
m+ ea
- Omelm Ede1Mg P•nca ea noted
m
-p
I I °F� � ob
_
1 1/ �i
/
� � A
-
r
1 r I \
OJ
I i��
N
I
w - Dm+tea Dvl. vaw
o - Omolea storm Mea,a.
- wngt. Pe,v anem
g
— 455.600 r ^
- -.
•.r
22 •35
/I ,e
4'. I
\z \
I
O - Dm+Im D.Idc Boa
B - Dmvlea Ward Pm(
— T.97
.
` •
o I
's C
C _ D-1. Fla Pd•
g
- +_ •• —t. Undmgrmnd Gga
- pen<le+ Canm+la Surlem
T -
-__< _ -- -
__ -
� <' <
—�:�—
"%
—
~em
_ I I
r�
J✓
I , (,r`t` ^J/ \
/
Ex
0 - Dmote+ Cee Nets
« — D.M. MA, optic
••• — - Dm<lm a.mmd malty Lln.
�
�eo i r
I
,7'
!��
1
P�—
— — —
LYE�Fv�
*� vvi 1V,
��
I
ry
I
I nvnii i ivir
qm
O
I `
�-
%
I I
— — — -
IcEr )
Ifibit C
,OPERTY SURVEY
z
,—I ["
qz
4
ci
w�
CD
U � �
2)
(1) o (2)
d Cl) U 0
m
ca
Q) ry c
_0 a v
cl) a) g)
cv N
1.1� L L L
Q Q
C�
(D 'E E�
-E c? NCO
6S6L- 68b- £9LIX2A 006L- 68b- £9L:auoyd
e ;osauulW 'pooMaaoyg
17TOSS NW 'saljp -I ou1� 'OOT a }Ins 'aa ollody 8vz
8f1'13 A211Nf103 �r/)IN013NNIW
9NI-Mm fts, JNR333N19N3 ^-I—N3 WNo21IAN3
NW
ulo���
- GnU O4rDul
IOZ a�InS - anuand uo�6wyspM TOZL
•
S3WOH AWVIJLVW
u®slaa� C�
O£OZ NV Id 3sn aNV I ®3SOdO'dd
°
m o
o
z
,—I ["
qz
4
ci
w�
CD
U � �
2)
(1) o (2)
d Cl) U 0
m
ca
Q) ry c
_0 a v
cl) a) g)
cv N
1.1� L L L
Q Q
C�
(D 'E E�
-E c? NCO
6S6L- 68b -£9L :XRA 006L- 68t -£9L :a)UOgd e40sauUIN 'poonnaJOyS
MOSS NW 's9�e'1 ouij 'OOT ajinS'.Ip ollodV BtZ snl:) AIUNf10:) V)IN013NNIW
9NIA ZIAMnS -°JNRi33NION3 ^"7V1N3WNOMIAN3 6£bSS NW ' 3
UIp��W eui p
TOZ 94!nS - anuanV uo}6uiyseM TOZL N
O S3WOH AWdll\/W
UOS JO o o N
I � S1OI2I1SI0 JNINOZ JNIISIX3
w .gay MCI
?� v1
uos
,f ❑ a u
1
ro
1 1 )
t4
Cl) I
U)
ai , ro
V O
PSI qnlo
LU
Ct
el q 10 oo
U v
I
SCI
- p
d
,
�ea`S� a a a o
—+ g S o a
CN
Q)
U! ro Uro ro o
. � � U
a �Q1 N OT LT
C N m N f m U
w � � � Q� ll�
- ❑❑❑ ❑❑ 9
� PSI >Iaan:] �
13A ri 71
C3
�❑ ❑
y�
CI)
C1 O O J(] ti
❑ I
Z 4 m U ❑
}r W r r r r
_ ❑ ry it
cn
LLI
0
19
K O " v " w c w at 1� /A�j•1,
G .r'c�
�
7.1 -
,0 y F u 5� o-W° I, � � N r eO o •'O � .,L .. �v d - � pc0 Y C-
Cri
r-1 P,
rm"�u rd a °�'- w a c-ao v� " 7w v .c c�a y ° is",v or'ccom muw U aci C 0.I
e o ti O' c o°i a n o o .a .. ou o .�°- W •- c 'c v o m� w° o W h o .c Ra 5 y a S r z ¢° z 5 a° m '� v- O N }�
o :� '•-� F ys, m o _ ra m ... o
4 e E o b o a .. �^ ° .m N c 2 c v c i F" 'S c " G en 5 v o a y o• "'°o, m o `� 0 2 O N r
.o 'a o° d G c o 'a .c `.0 ,;; o ... `� 'a A o v° a c �'. N W
o p m° r 4 .°. z y !^ k y c �N+ ` c' o w n ``• m .c m y 'S :'S W W s e a, '" '6`0 w ° o a o- ru
c°, ti sa .a • H ao"o - °' cF°. ". 'g o c .5 c r o E• m o o c « .c° x a H v •� w ^ '^ a o .� y N [u 3 d iv W
O' •° o ! �' "' .5 m 5C ..: a H c z N 'Su a .S N = c� F a o9 m `o 'u •o S 'm r�° c: U i
ti ^. ° °° x 5 w o' .c a .� ,H w •o c° s c w `. S O 2 w ? 9 U a ti t N .� ,R N
cm
'x ❑
is -• DD n m d V M U p t O .. O -O„ m 'F _ v O z
y m m° v d W a ,$ o rn .c e° .5 0 >, �' .c .o W 'y s° S c 'y .d o •S d Z •'o n`
z n `. y+ N y" u y y .N c m- a o .G m '$ v T o e ,� o w x
Z y" c •° o A a e N° ,;; v o ..c.. =1 ,.j Z 5 O W u y1 o o ri W aoi o. ti G m W❑ Q U _
_ �i n v
o a c a " G°G o , .5 ° y m •9 F 6 5 �° " v w a '� a •^� C� w W ^', '°ro .o-1 ^ o pa •p°p .. C y F .'L' .5 N E n -❑ �
fA C '.v-' p ..>. y O� ^u r. E D O O vO. M O '' d C. m M 0 5 C o m C" v 55 C. C O o M 0 0 0
o% v 9 N H V .ar 5 .y c a °m, m ., o c C a) ILI
C U'
o m c a C c. o o W a .= .5 01 ° m o .c �i s a iO " v o 'S m: '! a o B o v o Z o o° z s c z g U �., n a .a ❑ ❑ O °
d atJ y C W d y O O CO O V .fl [L v❑ - U ,L' G o o w
-Ei v v C N v h
a"i O C o = m ."yC y SJ- C -C. e�i� .G m O tOi v- 0.4
NC O C w o p .-
.c 10 o r ... 4 •a H o. >: �' o o, y •N o m GG� o e `0 2 'v z r W o I''@mIIIII eIA'�
y � r c W W WO C 1u' "
w `� •g " c n Oti «. ' ro a .o z r13A :.? , = y c O .i " W � ` °o 0 a n a uo p $ 'e y y z o " •a° P v c _ w° O5 U o '4
° ti i V o c i°A a o
Z m 5 rd ° ° >
h ° ° O m u 'c •'°o � ' ° " [" ii
\'.AW1I9p
cc? O ,c c [u .a 5 o c a v v x F v •S m y °o W d a 3 v r,, . cE 1O W ran c r m a°�i° •°^ 1 ,
Fcz aaxz O' f- a Fv
_ yvoi. .5z .Jw ..1 <C°C .ot oaU w °
'• i 1 )' !' � ^_- _1,Lr% � QQ../ �� \`'\\1\ ,;,\ � � / �J�� l",. /r /i , /��hy.;,..j i1(t -��\, ,.,- �;�`, \`l\ 1\ Ir •.�JII /•;� /�. �l�i�;
/� �i ��/ %� /�(i-w" ii1tr - t \ >> \ v / ✓ f C
JIB
N
�tl
\I \
LU
\ % J 1 III ti\ �.,..; i ' /'ll ! /' '�J
�✓�� \1`.4� , \ \' Jrr""���T r,r,\( 1 \,\ \Cy �� ✓.,1 v ( � \\ ••, �.�/ // .�
—)/ _ %�_ i i b713M i } I } j (�� �' '�, \: \,`L_ \ ,/ — j ���l \' \ \' •'``6c l' \ �- `� \11 \t ' I �, � { _.� \ . � i� �`
/ ! i % I ) � ��' /•-� _�- __ _.. .\ y'• \• \\ 1 /// � 1 � � t\ \\ \. c �,\ / f Ili
�� / /�jt %.1I I1`� � /!J� ' /� � - - -� � .- s�'•,'�\,\ ,.. / � /i/ � �` \\ \ }\ , III �I� ��
f _L TI �Fl�` � \ \� '`` -,`!) f � *. � ^� `' /' - ,���a: •:,;` - k - ---T I- ``_= �-- �- •_ -`�.1 �'l'' -- l 1��� \t I �
uj
cNV
gym'
'1``= ,11; „(' /� ' ►� jl'iNJ /� �\ 4 j
;;�J(r-ji ✓,I`Ij (`
/ r
�.^�,,.; I `VIII \../ �I // � I` � ; \`I ; \`' \�` I� � \�•�'��`�'` `-\JI ��/ I JiIII'I `I �/ b��/ � //! I l/ r � I `, �`,\,\ \�,`�.,'
,r- 1. � II i i J , $ ', \ � 1 -' `` ', �-'” � \ \� � ____ ❑ � i w1 Ali' � , . /- �� /�� '% �' / \ •�. , \\\ �, � \,� .,_�
/ 1 J� I \{ �� . \ J „ \�\ '`•� z (l \� /' " -� /h
I ��, t.. -•,r,I '`, ! \� \�\ _ l t/� �Ii "1 ,�r PSI''' J.� / /e���� "•• z�, ~\ \ \�
r \ , Imo/ \` � � \, ' \ \� "`'�"ti "" `�,, �� I' i •�(�������, /�`% �,�~ �— ,\ � \\
J / \ ,I i•' i 11 r \`\,l\`` \� / / /� / /{j}/q�� _ -.," . \, `ti\;'i / P I v I / / // r-'. �\ �\
VA
IW `' \.,._ \ i �t ,�.,i \_ i i` i. ) ` ` -•i ` �\ ^ ✓�•`` J =�� �.'j/
6S6/- 68t,- £9L:Xed 006L- 68t7- £9L :auoyd
KOSS NW 'saN2� oUI 'OOT a ;!nS '�a ollody S'bZ
IA3A
'' JN2if1S-9NRf33NI9N3 ^- IY.LN3WNOt1IAN3
I.IOSIap:) �,
e�osauulW 'pooMaaoyg
Snia A'dlNno3 VNN013NNIW
- @nUD NW 046U
TpZ ajing - anuany uo�6ultaseM TOZL
S3WOH JlWt�llt/W
�
�-
,
e
;
m
SNOIlI4N0� 31IS
;a
�w
0
19
K O " v " w c w at 1� /A�j•1,
G .r'c�
�
7.1 -
,0 y F u 5� o-W° I, � � N r eO o •'O � .,L .. �v d - � pc0 Y C-
Cri
r-1 P,
rm"�u rd a °�'- w a c-ao v� " 7w v .c c�a y ° is",v or'ccom muw U aci C 0.I
e o ti O' c o°i a n o o .a .. ou o .�°- W •- c 'c v o m� w° o W h o .c Ra 5 y a S r z ¢° z 5 a° m '� v- O N }�
o :� '•-� F ys, m o _ ra m ... o
4 e E o b o a .. �^ ° .m N c 2 c v c i F" 'S c " G en 5 v o a y o• "'°o, m o `� 0 2 O N r
.o 'a o° d G c o 'a .c `.0 ,;; o ... `� 'a A o v° a c �'. N W
o p m° r 4 .°. z y !^ k y c �N+ ` c' o w n ``• m .c m y 'S :'S W W s e a, '" '6`0 w ° o a o- ru
c°, ti sa .a • H ao"o - °' cF°. ". 'g o c .5 c r o E• m o o c « .c° x a H v •� w ^ '^ a o .� y N [u 3 d iv W
O' •° o ! �' "' .5 m 5C ..: a H c z N 'Su a .S N = c� F a o9 m `o 'u •o S 'm r�° c: U i
ti ^. ° °° x 5 w o' .c a .� ,H w •o c° s c w `. S O 2 w ? 9 U a ti t N .� ,R N
cm
'x ❑
is -• DD n m d V M U p t O .. O -O„ m 'F _ v O z
y m m° v d W a ,$ o rn .c e° .5 0 >, �' .c .o W 'y s° S c 'y .d o •S d Z •'o n`
z n `. y+ N y" u y y .N c m- a o .G m '$ v T o e ,� o w x
Z y" c •° o A a e N° ,;; v o ..c.. =1 ,.j Z 5 O W u y1 o o ri W aoi o. ti G m W❑ Q U _
_ �i n v
o a c a " G°G o , .5 ° y m •9 F 6 5 �° " v w a '� a •^� C� w W ^', '°ro .o-1 ^ o pa •p°p .. C y F .'L' .5 N E n -❑ �
fA C '.v-' p ..>. y O� ^u r. E D O O vO. M O '' d C. m M 0 5 C o m C" v 55 C. C O o M 0 0 0
o% v 9 N H V .ar 5 .y c a °m, m ., o c C a) ILI
C U'
o m c a C c. o o W a .= .5 01 ° m o .c �i s a iO " v o 'S m: '! a o B o v o Z o o° z s c z g U �., n a .a ❑ ❑ O °
d atJ y C W d y O O CO O V .fl [L v❑ - U ,L' G o o w
-Ei v v C N v h
a"i O C o = m ."yC y SJ- C -C. e�i� .G m O tOi v- 0.4
NC O C w o p .-
.c 10 o r ... 4 •a H o. >: �' o o, y •N o m GG� o e `0 2 'v z r W o I''@mIIIII eIA'�
y � r c W W WO C 1u' "
w `� •g " c n Oti «. ' ro a .o z r13A :.? , = y c O .i " W � ` °o 0 a n a uo p $ 'e y y z o " •a° P v c _ w° O5 U o '4
° ti i V o c i°A a o
Z m 5 rd ° ° >
h ° ° O m u 'c •'°o � ' ° " [" ii
\'.AW1I9p
cc? O ,c c [u .a 5 o c a v v x F v •S m y °o W d a 3 v r,, . cE 1O W ran c r m a°�i° •°^ 1 ,
Fcz aaxz O' f- a Fv
_ yvoi. .5z .Jw ..1 <C°C .ot oaU w °
'• i 1 )' !' � ^_- _1,Lr% � QQ../ �� \`'\\1\ ,;,\ � � / �J�� l",. /r /i , /��hy.;,..j i1(t -��\, ,.,- �;�`, \`l\ 1\ Ir •.�JII /•;� /�. �l�i�;
/� �i ��/ %� /�(i-w" ii1tr - t \ >> \ v / ✓ f C
JIB
N
�tl
\I \
LU
\ % J 1 III ti\ �.,..; i ' /'ll ! /' '�J
�✓�� \1`.4� , \ \' Jrr""���T r,r,\( 1 \,\ \Cy �� ✓.,1 v ( � \\ ••, �.�/ // .�
—)/ _ %�_ i i b713M i } I } j (�� �' '�, \: \,`L_ \ ,/ — j ���l \' \ \' •'``6c l' \ �- `� \11 \t ' I �, � { _.� \ . � i� �`
/ ! i % I ) � ��' /•-� _�- __ _.. .\ y'• \• \\ 1 /// � 1 � � t\ \\ \. c �,\ / f Ili
�� / /�jt %.1I I1`� � /!J� ' /� � - - -� � .- s�'•,'�\,\ ,.. / � /i/ � �` \\ \ }\ , III �I� ��
f _L TI �Fl�` � \ \� '`` -,`!) f � *. � ^� `' /' - ,���a: •:,;` - k - ---T I- ``_= �-- �- •_ -`�.1 �'l'' -- l 1��� \t I �
uj
cNV
gym'
'1``= ,11; „(' /� ' ►� jl'iNJ /� �\ 4 j
;;�J(r-ji ✓,I`Ij (`
/ r
�.^�,,.; I `VIII \../ �I // � I` � ; \`I ; \`' \�` I� � \�•�'��`�'` `-\JI ��/ I JiIII'I `I �/ b��/ � //! I l/ r � I `, �`,\,\ \�,`�.,'
,r- 1. � II i i J , $ ', \ � 1 -' `` ', �-'” � \ \� � ____ ❑ � i w1 Ali' � , . /- �� /�� '% �' / \ •�. , \\\ �, � \,� .,_�
/ 1 J� I \{ �� . \ J „ \�\ '`•� z (l \� /' " -� /h
I ��, t.. -•,r,I '`, ! \� \�\ _ l t/� �Ii "1 ,�r PSI''' J.� / /e���� "•• z�, ~\ \ \�
r \ , Imo/ \` � � \, ' \ \� "`'�"ti "" `�,, �� I' i •�(�������, /�`% �,�~ �— ,\ � \\
J / \ ,I i•' i 11 r \`\,l\`` \� / / /� / /{j}/q�� _ -.," . \, `ti\;'i / P I v I / / // r-'. �\ �\
VA
IW `' \.,._ \ i �t ,�.,i \_ i i` i. ) ` ` -•i ` �\ ^ ✓�•`` J =�� �.'j/
Imo'
9
C) �
-.1
LIA = w Z
_ tv M m
W W z .°n
� n V
U
A, ' �� \.r. �Irl - _I1i�l� V�V`'�- j�� t \ -� f�� /� -�i% ����� I i '� -�� ��\ i i %
I�r
I
Q t
6
.'�i
4
i
Jl 41-! 4 -'
01 �.
V-1
` 7 (
IJ
,����
zx -/� 1 Ji
"
1p
7
6S6L- 6817-£9L .xe=l 006L- 6817 -E9L :auoyd
KOSS NW 'saMej oul-1 'OOT aglnS '-ia ollodV 817-
JNLk3A8ns - JNIN33NI @N3 ^ 1V1N3NN02VM2
uOsIjo�
eaosauulW 'pooMaaoyg
an'm A211NnO3 VNNO13NNIW
6£17SS NW 'eU1Pg
i0Z a4lnS - anuany u0j6ul4seM TOZL
S3WOH AWVIIVW
o
~
m
'o
Nt/ld 1d3�N0J /M
Wt0 DVId JNISSVW 33211
N<
N
o N
zo
Imo'
9
C) �
-.1
LIA = w Z
_ tv M m
W W z .°n
� n V
U
A, ' �� \.r. �Irl - _I1i�l� V�V`'�- j�� t \ -� f�� /� -�i% ����� I i '� -�� ��\ i i %
I�r
I
Q t
6
.'�i
4
i
Jl 41-! 4 -'
01 �.
V-1
` 7 (
IJ
,����
zx -/� 1 Ji
"
1p
7
6S6L- 68t- £9L :xed 006L- 6" -£9L ;auoyd
KOSS NW 'sa )Je] oull 'OOT a4pS 'a0 ollody 8
'JNIA3AUnS^ ONR133NION3 >'IVJ- N3WNOUTAN3
uia:)Orq
uospo:) ()
e40sauuiW 'PoomT,jo45
gniD A211NnoD V)IN013NNIW
M3IA IVII13V
6£tiSS NW 'eu!P3
TOZ a}inS - anuany uO;6ulyseM TOZL
S3WOH AWVIIIVW
tOF °� a«`i
`� ° °
"'
.a •5 o .' m
F W t y Q m q a«i C A
mvr'io T° 'S «- oM' m c %'a
•O C v 5 C m 'J O '°
a
°' w v
3vr«. v u
r �
F o
vNi ..S
O' £ c M m•
W
GO rn d e u v d ` 'a � « '-
^
i �
W Lo,
± G F C o m 0.l m q .� v ` °'
.^
e d
u w g M zN
c
c
o
E
ti r W$ '� w V
� ._ •O o u a
O ^r
a o v ''G
v 00 E o o o ° o Z o
U] •C v Q x
•a
N O y O C w O If° �..
o
A. O z `3i t v" „ C
_ 4) ,�
L, .� W w 'i O M !%� °
F° tO" C GG�.. •o p� O W x C C v "a o ` �.: w
° .�D .G C
^ O '«°^ (ln `- 2.
4a g
y O y O a- G
'^ C9 :.. m M F H N d
d S O d bC
'3 ••W � O
C V Eo
,G
YOy.
O° NS U« .n " O y O r-1 •O •"C°' C y G' N a
C �Ej ^
d z G V ^
°
T.
O
0O
O
4p oi L"`O0
C t
:a m m C Oq y b C
,
lO = G 0 2
. " °
O VJ y 'G L O z
o«N a ;W D H V
y
7 j Q
G
°C
'
°C '
C C O C C ` O
.z 0. y D
y
o
-«
a A W W a ti z
O a o
rE ° . "
�` .(C 4°b i
° ¢ F
o
'm r G n n z
o O 'O _
o
" C o ° � a
e
w
1
�'
4 •£ ra m'. a
? 'M '° w 'ar'
^C v
c �
U .0
s
o
PC . ❑ p w
Is 0 a � O° " O O C O°
z U a 'LS � ti a o o M . .. ti
_
i ti C O O w C G ddM ° G O
^C Y 1 c
N« N ° M C w
rxG
i"
v W .^OC 'a 'S ?° r. C
L N
F w W
9pp
o <� d 6 W O C a LO O h L C
w
rr3 o .0
fid ` oo a �' c
o El y
ff c •a E W 5_ a o
•%
b a
.5 E= °>
v a o ti o c
W y
A C n d = W .9 5c W O W `°' w
v C o o u a H o G d w < o
U d vw o° r N 1p L' N N m :o '�' 'S c-0 m y .-^. O E p v°
d a
z E 'N O'. . z°
w ✓J p
Z 4 Cj
'p 4y T
t
d L O O O C t° �`
o c .y
W d ° n
- 10
«
«
� rC w i a $
✓ � ;V FC «C
N
=z�' °O
�,O
yY� ;ti
_
"`'� '
-°iO'
oy g
i w
v. ^ n L r
yyr°.
6, 2.4 N
C O � O ^
. 2 O � w ° O E
O '�
�j_
a C 4 � .
O
A L
° C
J
W w C
•z �.°. s ,a °G LW C .°[w
C dm .
4 p
'�C s
o^yaCi
O C O
�mmy ^
� .� w OC
Q �O
�. 'D
L= yW �' � O
�
C' �_W
`. N
Tff
.O s yN , ,
�
O �i tW
B
O¢^
.•'¢
O
V �V
'vW
_
5$y-�C
o
°' •O °
O° 3
"�-
`
r a O Cd i o E
o z
E
a F
c
'o m
z_c
m m..
n�n
wm z �'`� '
- � ° �
, L —v
o'°°"c
°o°'
�m�L
vO
.� ° «.° °° ' o
u ,, " °o � � °:
A0'
o
,GS Q
Qy_ Uc
a:Q'^
FW°cO •z .=
t F
;c = ° a
'•ooOc.
r w W
A m :? a
.� ,� .yiw n
.y 9,� .
_ '-
z E
! d k
y
v @
"
. o
,mU
Fv °
� Q
3 mo
W L! W
O N
u
y,Ny O IU
.0 U
r Y (0
11. O C
N E E
in CA X O
ru
C 2 N
W o ¢ o
W m U
J O O O
C C CD
41 N
In 0 O
.4
3
w
5
�a
N Z
6S6L- 68t -£9L :X2A 006L- 69t,-£9L .auo4d eJosauulW 'poonnaaoyS
VTOSS NW 'SGW1 null 'OOT a4InS '-[a ollodd SbZ '
` JNI),3AtinS -EJNR133NIE)N3- 1tl1N3WNOHIAN3 sm:) XMINno:) mi1N01'3NNYW
® 6£t55 NW 'eulp3
V� TOZ ajlnS - anuany uo46uluSeM TOZL
® S3WOH AWV.LJLVW z w
NVId 1d3:)NOD = o
w
d Ci UUdd
QQQ¢QQ
t0 (07ON
NMN` -ON
i � +i
Q
0
W
V Q W K
U Q
<W$ ¢
ZQZ�ZQ
Z' �Ld
OOQQdW
CO K Z z C)
KW
Q QIW-W QQ
oow?oo
Q W W W W W W W W Q Q
O }..- .- •�+ N^ ,� N Fes- ti 0
z
00¢
N
N
Q O
J Q Q¢ Q m¢ X
�Wm �W
WO UW(n UWNN Q�
¢m
2O ¢0I -I-�O Q p z J N
X00 ¢O Z1nOZ2UV7 OW¢
WW OW W W (nOF'W
¢¢oin o�noo�z000 0 oL
oorn\n NrnWt'nlninln�.h�In �Z._o
Q �
`
,
,
,
avo gm
\1 \
/
Ki
o i �
❑ a "... ✓min V-. ❑ !.` �_,- �. ❑ _.. —`.�: - _
m
i
,
1
❑_ \I \ \\ III
�I _� ❑ - -.
`
r
t ❑ - 1
LE
I , t
\ @ @@
/ r i
�(>
V.
I
4
V
Y
I
� 1 I I I I I •1
' I
\
— \— =\ — ❑ al IL
•
\
I l .
,
I _
I
'li
J
X11)
'mil
W
V
m
O
5
�1
i 2E
a
CC
VEA
6E�
-0.
0
0
3
m
L
0
W
r'!�1
T O
r�
O
� � O
0)
O
r m
a
U
o� 91
rI ' w or
4-4�+o all I I IIl�o
O
w
0
CD i a i i
Q x ---- 5� - - -- I y I I I�- - -o� --
a
00
O----- 0"b-- -- n tio, 1 f -- OV - - - - --
1 �I ------- OS-- -�-� -- �I d-� ---- OS- - - - - --
Ll I
0 o
0,09L
W
;4 • •
rr'
"I� O
�4-j
O
ri
O O
O
O
O
O
w
z
r
Ld
W /
0
0 m
U
r
3
i
0
i
CD
E
m
d �
U
Q m U_
I I I I
O O N N
O LO n (] N Co
PIT of
-H -H -H
o
m a°
Q c
Y J O
U)
� p Q
a a 0 0
a 3 C C
a m o m o
> > a a
o E E
J
W
I—
U
i
0 o v o a
m n
I O C', 00 rNj
I
I � �
Q c
Y J O
�ooe�
O L L
Q ` �c'ncn
o > 0 0
J
4 O
I
Q m U
r
I I 1 I
W Of MIX cz
z
J
z
z
w
U
z
U
1
Q v o 0
o�ot�
6
Q
0 o Q
O L L
Q L (n V)
O CL O O
CL Q-
J O •
p j N N
Z O
EE
0
W
J
Q
U �
N' W
U O0 Lwi
= Z
Q
cD Ln
O
a.
o o rn
r z � �n � rn
r=+
O
CO
z
O W ;
CL a
U X -~
G
Y
0 U
J m C
Li X =
W �
O =
J
O
Ld
Q -
U
N W
U_ O LWi
= Z
d
Q
C�
o o rn
z in in
r u� rn
w t�
ZCc,
w
O� o o
in
J
Uz x
W O X
�Vz0C,
z �a
•�
w O O
r
'D
J .�0 —'—' Q1
O
ul
Q 7 00
N a
O
z
J
O
U
W
U
J
Q
w
U
N W
U O Wi
= Z
D-
Q
yco
U N
¢
O
a.
o o rn
r z � �n � rn
r=+
O
CO
z
O W ;
CL a
U X -~
G
Y
0 U
J m C
Li X =
W �
O =
J
O
Ld
Q -
U
N W
U_ O LWi
= Z
d
Q
C�
ZCc,
w
u-]
u� m
O•
O
ul
W
y
r
L
U
o X
�VZ�LL
w
O
yco
um
¢
��
O
z
Ld
0
o
to
>
w
oa c
Q s0
Sa ck
lc"_
pTRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY
Technical Memorandum
To: Rick Packer, Mattamy Homes
From: Bryant Ficek, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Date: July 7, 2015
Re: Traffic Impact Review— Proposed Minnetonka Country Club Redevelopment in Shorewood
Mattamy Homes has proposed to redevelop the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) site into a housing
development. Located in the area bounded by Smithtown Road, Eureka Road, Country Club Road, and
Yellowstone Trail, the now closed golf course could accommodate 121 single family homes. The
potential traffic impacts of this redevelopment have been studied by the City. The purpose of this
memorandum is to review the City's work to ensure standard practices were followed and determine if
additional study is needed or warranted. The information presented in the Transportation Workshop on
April 28, 2015 was used for this review.
Study Methodology
As presented, the traffic review of the proposed MCC redevelopment followed a standard methodology
in examining the existing transportation system, examining the existing land use versus the proposed
land use, identify traffic issues, and determining potential improvement options. Information was
obtained from the City, the Minnesota ,Department of Transportation (MnDOT), the Met Council, and
the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), which are common sources routinely used for these
types of reviews. The volumes, roadway capacities, trip generation, and traffic projections were all
accurate and appropriately used.
The presented information and traffic review was properly completed using standard procedures and
common resources. No issues were found with the methodology.
Full Traffic Impact Study Requirements
Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) provide an assessment of existing and future traffic operations to identify the
impacts of a proposed development. The proposed MCC redevelopment used daily volumes to examine
the surrounding roadways. A TIS can also identify capacity deficiencies at key intersections and
potential mitigation to avoid safety or operational problems due to expected traffic from a proposed
development. However, this level of detail in a TIS is not always necessary. MnDOT has the following
guidelines that trigger the need for a fuller detailed TIS:
• Development proposals that are estimated to generate more than 250 peak -hour vehicle trips
or 2,500 new daily trips
• Development proposals that will be evaluated sufficiently by applying other elements of
guidance from the MnDOT Access Management Manual, such as access spacing
If these guidelines are not satisfied, than an intersection review in a more detailed TIS is generally not
needed. The proposed MCC redevelopment to 121 single family is expected to generate up to 1,252
trips on an average weekday and up to 125 trips during an average peak hour. Both fall below the
threshold that suggests a more detailed study is necessary.
Therefore, the review based upon daily volumes is acceptable for the proposed project. Furthermore,
with the golf course now closed, new traffic counts would be artificially lower and not reflective of the
existing land use if still open.
Exhibit F
APPLICANT'S TRAFFIC
CONSULTANT REPORT
Spack Consulting 2 of 2 Traffic Impact Review
for Mattamy Homes Proposed MCC Redevelopment
Study Results
Based upon the information presented, the traffic review of the proposed MCC redevelopment
concluded that:
• The existing area is a unique area by the Lake, making it more desirable for residents but also
complicating the transportation system.
• There are existing transportation issues on the surrounding roadways that were present with
the former golf course and unrelated to the proposed MCC redevelopment.
• The expected traffic from the proposed housing is higher than the former golf course.
• The surrounding roadways have available capacity, in terms of daily volumes, to accommodate
the increase in traffic associated with the proposed MCC redevelopment.
• The previous improvements to the County Road 19 /Smithtown Road /Country Club Road
intersection reduced cut - through traffic.
• Improvement options are limited by the topography, available right -of -way, and cost -to- benefit
of a project.
These points are all reasonable given the information presented and consistent with conclusions we
would have drawn.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The principle findings of this technical memorandum are:
• The traffic review of the proposed MCC redevelopment followed standard methodology.
• A more detailed study, such as a peak hour intersection review, is not necessary given the
relatively small trip generation of the proposed housing.
• The results of no significant impact on the surrounding roadways is accurate and similar to what
we would have concluded given the information presented.
• Options to improve existing traffic issues are limited by the characteristics of the area.
Although options are limited, more study should be completed to fully flesh out potential improvements
and evaluate their potential effectiveness and trade -offs. For instance, speed humps would result in
lower speeds and may further reduce traffic, but would result in more noise and present a daily obstacle
for residents. Speed humps are not acceptable on Municipal State -Aid Streets either. Potential
improvements should also recognize /encourage other modes of transportation.
FILE COPY
Minnetonka Country Club
Redevelopment Planning Advisory
Committee
Summary of Findings &
Recommendations
As Presented to the City Council
June 8, 2015
Attachment I
INTRODUCTION
The owners of the Minnetonka Country Club (MCC) decided to close the golf course and
related facilities and extended a private offer to sell to a selected group of private developers
The offer presented by Mattamy Homes was accepted and Mattamy currently controls the
property.
The Subject Property is currently guided Public - Semi Public on the Comprehensive Plan and it is
zoned R 1 A Low Density Residential, Any residential reuse of this property will require an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and may require a rezoning to a different underlying
zoning district and /or a Planned Unit Development.
The City did not seek the closure of the golf course. This was a private decision by a private land
owner, The land was not offered for sale to City, all or in part. Therefore, the control that the City
has over the future use of the property is limited to its authority to control the Comprehensive
Plan, zoning and subdivision approval.
The Planning Advisory Committee (PAC)- an intentional farm of community
engagement
A change in land use of the scale of the MCC property affects every property owner in the City
to a lesser or greater extent. It is also a change with multiple implications. There are many factors
that need to be understood and thought through to make well- reasoned decisions.
It is important to engage the community on matters of this significance and multiple forums and
approaches need to be deployed to share information and capture input. One of the inherent
challenges is that it is difficult for residents to take the time to become fully informed about all of
the relevant issues, or to listen to the viewpoints of other stakeholders.
The Planning Advisory Committee concept is not intended to replace any of the standard public
notice, public hearings, community informational meetings, websites, or other community
engagement opportunities, It is an additional opportunity for a selected group of community
residents to become fully informed about the project and then share their opinions with the City
Council and Developer,
The City Council identified and invited participants from throughout the City. They included
residents who own property very close to the MCC Property and others who live in other parts of
the community. Many of the members have served in the community in the past in either an
advisory or elected role.
PAC members attended a total of nine workshops and a meeting with the City Council on June
8, 2015. A graphic illustration of the process they participated in is attached as an appendix to
this report. The process began with the members identifying all of the issues that they believed
were important to address and all of the questions that they wanted answered, They also
participated in a form of SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities & threats) and
shared their visions for a successful future for the MCC property.
The next several workshops were educational in nature. They covered the nature and limits of
the City's authority, the rights of the land owner, land economics, comprehensive planning,
zoning, subdivision regulations, natural resources, traffic, area -wide redevelopment, parks, open
space, trails and more. All of those presentations and all of the input from individual PAC
members is available to support the Council and developer moving forward.
C;\ Users \jshardlow \Desktop \Planning Advisory Committee Summary of Findings and Recommendations.docx
The following summary is Intended to support the PowerPoint presentation given to the City
Council on June 8, 2015,
Council Direction
In addition to authorizing the overall process the City Council specifically asked the PAC
members to:
• Explore housing alternatives
• Evaluate ways to leverage the value created through redevelopment
• Evaluate potential street realignments
• Consider park dedication and reuse options
Findings Related to Traffic:
• Flagged as a key issue from the very beginning; by far the most referenced issue on all of
the PAC member's lists
• Biggest challenge is the fact that the "cut through" (Country Club /Yellowstone /Linden) is
a designated collector (MSA route)
• It is NOT IMPROVED TO COLLECTOR STANDARDS
• The net increase in traffic between a fully functioning golf course and the proposed
development is not significant
• Traffic conditions in the neighborhood vicinity are locally significant. Additional study is
recommended to identify the best approach to Improving the existing roadway system
• The majority of the members did not favor closing Country Club Drive. The City EMS, Fire
and Police all opposed this option as well
Developer's Responsibility
• Subdivision provides opportunity to address right of way issues on Country Club Drive
• Tax revenues (abatement) can support the funding of a trail on Smithtown
• Provide trail paralleling Country Club on MCC property
Proposed Zoning
• The Mattamy proposal (either with or without age - targeted housing types) would fit
within the R -1 C District standards
• Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning may not be essential, but could still prove
mutually beneficial
Issues:
The following were the issues that were cited most frequently by PAC members, although all of
their individual responses are important
• TRAFFIC
• Drainage
• Density- housing types, costs
• Trails
• Public access to open space
• Chance to do something Cool - mini town center
• & More
C: \Users \jshardlow \Desktop \Planning Advisory Committee Summary of Findings and Recommendations.docx
Vision
The redevelopment of the Minnetonka Country Club property resulted in a highly valued new
Shorewood neighborhood. New housing choices infused the community with new residents,
economic value and new opportunities, Modern building technology and excellent
development practices combined to achieve energy efficiency, the conservation and
enhancement of natural systems and other sustainable objectives.
Traffic generated from the development was accurately predicted and successfully managed
through a combination of design improvements and mitigation strategies.
SMALL GROUP DISCUSSION TOPICS:
There were a number of key issues that were identified as very important, Some of these issues
were directly relevant to the direction provided by the City Council at their January 17 retreat.
Each of the issues are identified along with the specific discussion questions, followed by the
consensus responses of the PAC.
1. Badger Park Redevelopment
a. Should the City pursue the redevelopment of Badger Park?
b. Should the City pursue redevelopment of the Lucky's site?
c. What is the optimum future use of the northwest corner of Smithtown /Hwy 19 /CC Road?
PAC Responses:
• Nearly unanimous support for aggressively pursuing the redevelopment of properties
surrounding the intersection, but moving the ball fields is probably not necessary
• Some remain open to relocating ball fields on to the MCC Property. This would preclude
the large wetland restoration
2. Open Space Options
a. Should the ball fields on Badger Park be relocated to the Matfamy site?
b. Passive open space and trails open to the public?
c. Small scattered wetlands and ponds versus larger restored wetland?
PAC Responses:
• The majority favored the restoration of wetlands, passive open space and trails versus
relocated ball fields
• The trails and open space should be open to the public
• The footprint of the restored wetland should be as close to the historic size as possible,
while preserving significant trees and meaningful open space and trails
3. Potential future redevelopment along Smithtown
a. Should the City explore redevelopment of this area?
b, Should the City acquire properties as they come up for sale and bank them until there is
a critical mass of City -owned properties and willing sellers to allow a development to
proceed?
PAC Responses:
• Majority open to future redevelopment of this area when property owners are ready to
sell and recognized the benefits of planning for the future development of this area in
conjunction with the Mattamy project
C:\ Users \jshardlow \Desktop \Planning Advisory Committee Summary of Findings and Recommendations.docx
• PAC members recognized that Mattamy may need to acquire one or more properties to
provide another access point along Smithtown and avoid excessive cul -de -sac lengths
• The group did not take a position on whether or not the City should use its EDA levy to
assemble funds to acquire properties as they come up for sale to facilitate future
redevelopment.
4. Sidewalk and trail development along Country Club Road
a. How important is this trail segment?
b. Should the trail be immediately adjacent to the roadway, or separate but parallel?
c. Could the north -south trail connection be made as part of the public trails within the
development?
d. What are the trade- offs /high priorities related to this trail?
PAC Responses:
• Trail is extremely important
• Majority favored "improvement" to Country Club Rd (Yellowstone Trail & Linden)
• Descriptions of "improvements" almost all referred to a trail paralleling the road
• The trail could be on the MCC Property if it was a reasonably direct connection between
Smithtown and Yellowstone
5. Sidewalk along Smithtown
a. Is this trail segment a high priority?
b. Are there other trail connectors important to analyze?
PAC Responses:
• Virtually unanimous support
• City proceeding with implementation
• The City is pursuing Tax Abatement as funding source
• Street crossings present opportunities for streetscape improvements and traffic calming
6. Should the redevelopment of the MCC Property and surrounding
properties result in the addition of a diversity of housing types?
PAC Responses:
• The majority favored the inclusion of some diversity in the housing types
• Minority just SF ( "multiple price points ")
• Some support for workforce housing - affordability, recognizing that the economics of
the project made it impossible for the Developer to offer housing at these costs without
public subsidy
Summary
• The PAC members met a total of 9 times between February and June
• All of the information that was reviewed, the presentations they received and all of their
questions, comments, suggestions and concerns and the tapes of the meetings are all
available for review
• There was strong consensus regarding all of the Issues summarized above
• The best actions to take regarding the Country Club /Yellowstone /Linden collector
challenges remain to be determined and warrant further study
C:\ Users \jshardlow \Desktop \Planning Advisory Committee Summary of Findings and Recommendations,docx
Lr)
cD
1 {l�i���r �rlp
fit
�: �� }����� •wail
�= gilll ...
- 11111
���� 1 III
r-1
e--I
O
N
a)
c-I
cD
V
d
fit
JIM
40 Li
a
N
V
d
M
10 N
Y p
M r N co
o
a G
U z
t
N
CV n
y
N r N CV)
O
m O
N
�/
I� C*J �--
C
•� �o a7 N
c
C
-
�
a
C U
O
V
C)
N
cu
•
`4
f
N
Lr) M
O
N
ffl
c-i
0
N
\
ri
t,D
e
s
Srf
4 3 �
Q
C.
ui
`2 N
E
k
0
N
r-I
q.F
vS�T�
U
d
C
41
V)
N
m
0
N
O1
c-I
Eel
T�
LJ
•�
di
i
vii
•�
a
N Q
O
Vs
jj
N
OC
O
0)
CL
0
O
V
c
O
O
U
io
Cl �=
o
.90)
O
>
i
•O
LdJ
N �
�
�
6
LJ>
�
LU
C
c
>
c,/ )
i
i
Eel
L
0
N
Q1
ci
CD
00
0
r.,
CF)
Minnetonka Country Club Redevelopment Public Meeting
Comment Card Responses -- 07.28.15
After reviewing the comments from the Minnetonka Country Club Redevelopment meeting, the
comments have been divided into three categories: Traffic, Neighborhood and Housing, and
Environment and Green Space.
Traffic Concerns
My comments for the City Council and Planning Commission
The issue (or issues) that are most
as they make decisions regarding this project:
important to me are:
Please consider omitting development entrance from Yellowstone
Traffic- especially on Yellowstone Trail at
and turn east cul de sac backing up to Country Club Road into an
the 7/41 Cub Foods intersection!
entrance instead. Take a sliver of the eastern edge of the
development and use it to widen Country Club into a road able to
handle more traffic. Yellowstone is narrow, windy and tree lined
and already unsafe for pedestrians. Any additional traffic,
particularly west of Country Club Drive would be dangerous.
Current planning seems to be attempting to discourage traffic on
Country Club. What if the south exit on the development exited
east onto Country Club... but more land was taken from the golf
course to widen and improve Country Club Rd? Make it a boulevard
with separated traffic lanes.
Country Club Lane has no signage -
We have lived on Smithtown Road since 1983 and have witnessed
dramatic increase of vehicular traffic. It's become difficult at nearly
any time of the day to access Smithtown. With this development
and the opening of Kowalski store, we anticipate worsening
conditions.
The traffic on Country Club and Yellowstone is already terrible. -
The cut through from CR 19 to Cub Foods be
Adding these homes and all their cars will be devastating.
closed or upgraded with a trail
Will there be signage that our road Country Club Road is a private
road or will be opening it to "thru traffic" as we are used to families
with children bicycling young and old, and children constantly
playing on what is now a quiet, "dead end rd ". Will you be adding
on to our road- Club Lane and open to traffic to this home owners
and the new development.
We were told that there would be no more than 110 -120 homes
and now there are 1401 This is way too much traffic for our roads -
our schools are full already. The proposed North to South traffic
west of Country Club is a terrible idea. Location of traffic through
lanes is a very bad placement
I live across the street from #140 proposed. The main Southern
The entrance /exit on the south onto
entrance /exit into this development is directly across from my
Yellowstone
house. This is a very quiet portion of Yellowstone currently, which is
why we moved here 6 years ago. The idea of routing traffic in /out
of this development onto this portion of Yellowstone is a horrible
idea. I have been in the custom home design /build business for 22
years. I will either move or get every single neighbor to protest on
this! Please have Mattamy contact me if they are interested in
Attachment II
buying my home for their entrance /exit green space or something
like that. I will wait to hear from them and stay in touch with the
city until they do.
I think Yellowstone Trail has a lot more traffic on it since Cub
Traffic on Yellowstone Trail
moved in, even those traffic studies have been made. I wait for 10
cars to go by before I can get out of my driveway. When the light
changes on 41, 1 have to wait for 10 cars to go by before I get out.
Same goes for traffic on Highway 19.
The neighborhood adjacent to this location had concerns when Cub
Traffic on Yellowstone, water draw down,
was proposed- at the meeting I felt we were pacified rather than
forced into C 2 G and city water down the
respected as a neighborhood. Is this going to happen again and the
road
city will bow to the developer, rather than uphold the wishes of the
current residents
No planned pedestrian /bike trail on Yellowstone?
Traffic on Yellowstone with planned access
road across from Club valley.
High speed on Yellowstone Trail from Country Club Road west has
Traffic, landscaping (trees), water usage,
markedly increased already this summer and needs to be
affordable housing is non - existent
monitored and decreased prior to this project beginning so that
behaviors can be in place.
The cul de sacs that stop at country Club make no sense- traffic will
be "forced" down on to Yellowstone which is wrong. We are
getting caught up in the developer's ideas for quiet cul de sacs in
their new neighborhood and forcing their traffic on to our existing
neighborhoods roads- this is very unfair.
I do not want any more traffic on Country Club or Yellowstone or
Lake Linden. You need to close down Country Club and push all
traffic to County Rd 19. Improving it will just encourage faster
traffic. There are houses with dogs and kids on Lake Linden and it is
windy and no one ever obeys the speed limit. I like narrow lanes
and slow traffic with lots of trees along them. This is why I live here.
I am also concerned about the water. We have a well and are
concerned that 140 more homes will draw down our water supply. I
think the lots are too small and the houses too big and not very
architecturally appealing- all the same.
Use Club Lane for Smithtown access
1. 1 do not think that the city council has the best interests of the
Traffic and density
neighboring properties in mind
2. Traffic will increase. Even a small increase in traffic flow will
exponentially affect intersections at 7/41 and 19 /Smithtown
Thanks for your hard work. Please continue to keep in mind the
Traffic on Yellowstone Trail and Country
inadequacy of nearby roads. They are not appropriate for increased
Club. It's unsafe and used already by cut -
traffic.
through drivers. It is inconceivable that
Keep lots of greenspace to maintain the feeling of Shorewood.
many more cars will use this route. Trails
and sidewalks are necessary, but the traffic
itself needs to be re- routed.
I am angry- I oppose this plan because it will be over population
Too much home density- preserving open
and causing more traffic congestion and issues. Shorewood public
green spaces, changing population in the
works has difficulty serving the established neighborhoods now!
schools, closing open enrollment.
Larry Brown ignores phone calls and doesn't take action on time.
Too many people in the city. Too many bikers and auto and joggers
on the road now. Just imagine how many more will be out there.
It's not safe and crime is increasing in the area.
It really seems crowded and the increased traffic bothers me. Hope
Safety concerns with exits coming off
they don't start working until 7:30 AM. We older people do not
Smithtown Road. The club traffic hardly ever
sleep well at night.
stopped before, plus the road is always busy
in the morning and evening. Need a stop
sign and to save the street trees.
** Traffic flow to Hwy 7
* *TRAFFIC
Street damage from construction vehicles- who pays for this ??
Drainage issues
Please consider me for the group working on the traffic study
Long term direction and impact of the city- we need to solve
Traffic! I
The worsening traffic situation. You can't direct more traffic along
Smithtown Road to Excelsior. Need another option to Route 7 ,
My concern is traffic on Yellowstone and Cub stoplight. I have been
Traffic
forced off the road several times by drivers while pushing a double
stroller and just walking. Need a way to limit traffic.
Neighborhood and Housing Concerns
My comments for the City Council and Planning Commission as
The issue (or issues) that are
they make decisions regarding this project:
most important to me are:
-The more exits out of the neighborhood the better
Please don't make a "cookie cutter"
- Consider a park centrally located in the neighborhood for children
neighborhood. Have diversity
among home styles and exterior
finishes
Ensure the plan adds long term value to the community. Maintain a unique
Right now, finalizing plan and
proposition that continues to set Shorewood apart from other cookie cutter
understanding impacts to property,
communities.
bike trail, excavation, tree loss etc.
These are the ugliest looking homes I have ever seen. No one will buy them
The entire development does not
at that price!
"fit in" to our community!
1. A careful examination of how the disturbance of 70+ years of chemicals
1. Water quality
used in turf maintenance will affect the well water of homes adjacent to
2. Affordable housing
the golf course
3. Just Wages
2. The claim that a "variety" of housing types are part of the project seems
misleading- as seems to be always the case. Affordable housing received at
best cursory consideration. Apparently an increase in the number of houses
has already occurred. Couldn't there easily be half a dozen $250,000-
$300,000 homes scattered among 135 $900,000 homes?
3. Has any investigation been done of Mattamy's sub - contracting practices?
Do they generally hire union workers? The city has already granted them a
great deal; would it be too much to ask that they guarantee to pay just
wages?
I appreciate the open house forum
Existing adjacent properties will not
see increase in property taxes
I'm really concerned about the lack of diversity in the model homes
Mattamy doesn't cut and run and is
Mattamy is building. They are a nat!Qnal builder of moderately constructed
held to a high standard that adds to
homes.
the quality of Shorewood.
Architectural integrity is important.
This development proposal looks horrible. Wedging 140 houses into the
Proposes houses next to existing
Country Club is a shame! We border the course and our house is going to
houses
be looking into the back windows of 3 or 4 houses!! 1 AM VERY UPSET WITH
THIS PROPOSAL
Environmental and Green Space Concerns
My comments for the City Council and Planning Commission as they
The issue (or issues) that
make decisions regarding this project:
are most important to me
are:
If we are going to develop then we need to also think about recreation areas
within that area. Not having some sort of play area for families included in the
area does not make sense.
There was talk of parks, green space, trails, sidewalks etc. I don't see any of this.
Added traffic and density is
We boycott this development and are planning to move.
too much for our
neighborhood!
We are set back from the road on Seamans Drive near the back of the property. I
Natural tree and plant buffer
hope to have a good buffer between the back yard and the construction
between my lot and the cul
de sac
Glad to see more mixed housing- still a need for "workforce" housing in
Maximum environmental
Shorewood. Would like the project to be attractive from CC Road (trees, trail,
protection including wetlands
planting). We do not want to look at 2 -3 story walls of mansions. Traffic still needs
and pollinator friendly
sorting out
plantings
What about cleaning up all the bushes and weeds in from of the Golf course land.
So it looks better, and get rid of weeds on the land down by the country club little
red gate, down by our next door neighbor's house and put new grass in the
development of the land. Also, put a slow -down sign on Smithtown Road because
people drive too fast.
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 • 952- 960 -7900
Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.nm.us • cityha11@ci.shorewood.nui.us
ci.shorewood.nm.us
DATE: July 28, 2015
TO: Brad Nielsen, Planning Director
FROM: Paul Hornby, City Engineer
RE: Minnetonka Country Club Concept Plan Review
I have completed my review of the proposed concept plans submitted by Mattamy Partnership, with
revisions date July 21, 2015. Plans were prepared by Carlson McCain and I have the following general
development comments:
■ The concept plan open space is proposed public areas with trails, storm water facilities, and
vegetation as an amenity. There has also been discussion as part of the PAC to create or restore
wetland in the southern portion of the site.
Trails — The combination of trails and sidewalks are recommended with the following
modifications:
Off- street trails are at least 8 feet in width
Sidewalks are concrete and 6 feet in width
• Sidewalks are extended on all of the main roadways on one side
• Sidewalk should extend from the Smithtown Road access road on the west to east street to
Country Club Road
Sidewalk or trail should extend to the south end of the Country Club Road trail via the SE
cul -de- sac /plat line
Off- street trails will need to be designed /constructed to reduce animal and tree root damage
Drainage/Water Quality requirements — The proposed development will need to meet the
requirements of the City Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) and the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District (MCWD) requirements. The applicant will need to provide more detailed
information about the existing drainage outlet that exits the site toward Yellowstone Trail. The City
has very limited information on this drainage system and it is believed to be a private drainage pipe
from the site, eventually discharging to Lake Minnewashta. This system appears to be a draintile
system and the allowable discharge rate and volume will need to be estimated to meet proposed
discharge with the development. The developer will also need to show that there is a legal access to
the use of this drainage system for the MCC property.
Memo to Brad Nielsen July 28, 2015
Re: Concept Plan Review Minnetonka Country Club Site Page 2 of 2
Utilities — Public utilities will need to be extended throughout the plat and stubs provided in key
location for future extension and connections.
• Watermain — The Smithtown Road watermain is 16- inches in diameter and will be the
primary connection of the development water distribution system. The watermain will need
to be sized to serve the development needs and looped to the Smithtown Road watermain.
Stubs to Country Club Road, Yellowstone Trail and Club Lane will be required at various
locations for future extension.
• Sanitary sewer — The sanitary sewer connection is to be into the existing MCES sewer
located in the SE portion of the site. The connection will need to be permitted through the
City and the MCES. The development layout will need to accommodate the existing MCES
sewer alignment in this area, or the sewer will need relocation with the development.
• The streets will need to be designed with a storm sewer system and storm water facilities to
meet water quality, runoff and rate control requirements. The storm water facilities will be
outside of the public right of way.
Secondary roadway connection to Smithtown Road — A secondary access roadway is needed in
the NW or western portion of the site due to the length of the proposed cul -de -sac. The applicant
indicates allowing this secondary access road to be part of future development when the property
between the proposed concept plan and Smithtown Road develops. The applicant also proposes
constructing a trailhead between Smithtown Road and the westerly cul -de -sac for use as an
emergency access. An access road to reduce cul -de -sac length is needed as part of this project. The
secondary access road is to meet City spacing requirements and is preferred to connect to
Smithtown Road at either Fairway Drive or Star Lane.
■ Wetland restoration /creation — The City is interested in creating and /or restoring wetlands in the
southern portion of the proposed development open space. The wetland improvements could serve
as a means to account for the development wetland impacts and provide wetland bank credits
available to BWSR. The City Engineer will work with the city consultant on the feasibility of
creating a wetland bank as well as laying out the procedural requirements.
Traffic — During the PAC meetings, traffic was a discussion topic that did receive investigation. In
general, it was determined that the traffic the development will generate will not contribute
significantly to the traffic volume on Country Club Road, as compared to a well functioning golf
course with similar facilities. Additional traffic study should be performed by the developer with
the development application to estimate traffic loading to Smithtown Road, Country Club Road,
Yellowstone Trail, and Lake Linden Drive.
Additional engineering review and comment will need to be addressed as the proposed project progresses to
preliminary plat, construction plans, and final plat stages.
Please contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information regarding this Concept Plan
Review.
#5
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
To: Park Commission
From: Twila Grout – Park Administrative Assistant
Reviewed by: Brad Nielsen – Planning Director
Date: July 30, 2015
Re: Freeman Park Entrance Garden - Memorial Plaque
Diane Agnew was a volunteer who tended to the Freeman Park Entrance garden from the time the "Adopt-
A-Garden" started in 2000. Diane passed away in 2014.
Norma Marien who now volunteers in tending to the garden and Pat Arnst, asked if the Park Commission
could put a memorial plaque/sign at the garden in honor of Diane.
It was suggested that the sign say:
In Memory of
Diane Agnew
Dedicated Garden Volunteer
Staff has researched the cost of a plaque and it would be around $95.00. Attached is a sample of the plaque.
The Park Commission will need to determine if they would like staff to purchase the memorial plaque
for the garden in honor of Diane Agnew.
#9
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
To: Park Commission
From: Twila Grout – Park & Rec Coord./Admin. Asst.
Date: July 29, 2015
Re: Determine Liaison for City Council Meetings
Once the commission has determined who will be the liaison to the meetings listed below, a schedule will be
made and distributed to the Park Commission.
Park Commission Meeting Report at City Council Meeting Liaison
August 11, 2015 August 24, 2015
September 8, 2015 September 14, 2015
October 13, 2015 October 26, 2015
November 10, 2015 November 23, 2015
December 8, 2015 TBD