HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Packet; 03-13-17 #3
26105 Wild Rose Lane, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, Phone: 952 -401-8757, Fax: 952-401-8798
Memorandum
Date: Revised February 6, 2017
To: Stephen Wensman, City of Lake Elmo
cc: Rick Packer, H.C. Golf Course Development, LLC
Kristina Handt, City of Lake Elmo
Mark Kjolhaug, Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company
From: Rob Bouta, Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company
Re: Updated Shoreland PUD Evaluation, The Royal Golf Club Residential
Development, Lake Elmo, MN (KES 2016-118)
On behalf of H.C. Golf Course Development, LLC, we are submitting this updated Shoreland
PUD Evaluation for The Royal Golf Club Residential Development. This submission includes
updated shoreland evaluation tables, suitable area and open space maps, and a workbook of
shoreland density and open space calculation spreadsheets. Overall, this submission has fewer
residential units and more open space in shorelands than previous submissions. It is consistent
with requirements for residential densities, setbacks, open space, and building heights, as set
forth in the City of Lake Elmo Shoreland Management Overlay District Ordinance and MN
Rules 6120.2500-6120.3900.
PUD Design Revisions
The updated PUD design implements several revisions that reduce potential effects on
shorelands. These revisions include:
1. reducing the overall shoreland density from 111 to 100 single-family lots, resulting in a
PUD that has only 44% of the allowed residential density;
2. removing 10 residential lots and the related street from the Lake Elmo shoreland to
increase protection of steep slopes, open space, and natural communities;
3. increasing the open space proportion of the Lake Elmo shoreland from 49.8 to 59.9%;
Memorandum – Updated Shoreland PUD Evaluation, The Royal Golf Club Residential Development
Revised February 6, 2017
Page 2
4. improving street connections and community connectivity in the Lake Elmo and Downs
Lake shorelands;
5. decreasing the residential density of the Downs Lake shoreland from 7 to 3 residential
lots and increasing the open space proportion of the Downs Lake shoreland from 52.3%
to 68.9%;
6. refining the residential design of the Lake Rose shoreland to reduce the depth of selected
lots and increase the open space; and
7. removing the narrow ribbon of open space previously proposed along the shoreline of
Horseshoe Lake.
Additional Results
Additional results that further demonstrate that the project minimizes effects on shorelands
include:
1. the project will not include any riparian lots;
2. residential structures will exceed required setbacks from the OHWs of Lake Elmo,
Downs Lake, and Horseshoe Lake by more than 150%;
3. shoreland impact zones of Lake Elmo and Downs Lake are outside the project area;
4. shoreland impact zones of Lake Rose and Horseshoe Lake will be at least 70% open
space;
5. bluffs and bluff impact zones will be avoided; and
6. shoreland open space will incorporate most steep slopes in shorelands and cover 50.5% of
the total shoreland area.
Response to Previous Requests
Previous correspondence with the City of Lake Elmo and the Minnesota DNR has included
requests for:
1. steep slope mapping, which was provided in the EAW Record of Decision documents;
2. maps showing net suitable areas and proposed open space areas, which are included with
this submission;
3. Excel spreadsheets showing residential density and open space calculations, which are
included with this submission;
4. Conservation easements, which will be prepared and submitted with the preliminary
plat/PUD application; and
Memorandum – Updated Shoreland PUD Evaluation, The Royal Golf Club Residential Development
Revised February 6, 2017
Page 3
5. an erosion and sedimentation control plan, which will be submitted with the preliminary
plat/PUD application.
Methodology Used
This PUD evaluation follows the site density evaluation methods described under MN Rules
6120.3800 for shoreland PUDs. DNR public waters were excluded from total shoreland areas.
The shoreland of the DNR watercourse was evaluated as part of the Lake Elmo shoreland. The
shoreland overlap between Lake Rose and Horseshoe Lake was divided between the two
shorelands. Each shoreland area was divided into tiers based on tier dimensions specified in
rules and ordinances. Suitable areas were calculated by subtracting regulated wetlands and bluffs
from shoreland areas. Suitable areas were divided by required lot sizes to calculate the allowable
density for each tier. Proposed densities were tallied from the number of lots on the Site Plan.
The Site Plan is shown on the attached suitable area and open space maps. Open space was
calculated by subtracting areas of street right-of-ways, residential lots, and the entry monument
lot from total shoreland areas.
PUD Evaluation Tables
The shoreland evaluation tables follow. Tables 1 and 2 show the overall shoreland density
evaluation and open space percentages. Tables 3 and 4 show the tiered shoreland density
evaluation and open space for the Lake Elmo and the DNR public watercourse. Tables 5
through 10 show similar data for the Downs Lake, Lake Rose, and Horseshoe Lake shorelands.
Please let me know if you have questions regarding this submission. You may reach me at
robb@kjolhaugenv.com or (612) 581-0546.
Memorandum – Updated Shoreland PUD Evaluation, The Royal Golf Club Residential Development
Revised February 6, 2017
Page 4
Table 1. Overall Shoreland Density Evaluation
Shoreland
Total Area Regulated
Wetlands
(sq.ft.)
Bluffs
(sq.ft.)
Net Suitable Area Required
Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Allowable
Base
Density
Proposed
Density Sq. Ft. Acres Sq. Ft. Acres
Lake Elmo/DNR Watercourse 1,240,208 28.47 2,057 39,287 1,198,864 27.52 15,000 79.9 21
Downs Lake 338,333 7.77 27,364 0 310,969 7.14 20,000 15.5 3
Lake Rose 1,799,640 41.31 16,443 0 1,783,197 40.94 20,000 89.2 41
Horseshoe Lake 886,313 20.35 12,032 0 874,281 20.07 20,000 43.7 35
Total 4,264,494 97.90 57,896 39,287 4,167,311 95.67 228.3 100
Table 2. Overall Shoreland Open Space Calculation
Shoreland
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Not Open Space Net
Open
Space
(sq.ft.)
% Open
Space Lots
(sq.ft.)
Street
Right-of-
Way
(sq.ft.)
Lake Elmo 1,240,208 317,994 179,618 742,596 59.9
Downs Lake 338,333 27,048 78,225 233,060 68.9
Lake Rose 1,799,640 506,747 377,169 915,724 50.9
Horseshoe Lake 886,313 507,334 117,552 261,427 29.5
Total 4,264,494 1,359,123 752,564 2,152,807 50.5
Memorandum – Updated Shoreland PUD Evaluation, The Royal Golf Club Residential Development
Revised February 6, 2017
Page 5
Table 3. Lake Elmo Shoreland Density Evaluation
Tier
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Regulated
Wetlands
(sq.ft.)
Bluffs
(sq.ft.)
Net
Suitable
Area
(sq.ft.)
Required
Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Allowable
Base
Density
Cumulative
Allowable
Density
Proposed
Density
Cumulative
Proposed
Density
Tier 1 (0-267 feet) 91,700 0 0 91,700 15,000 6.1 6.1 0 0
Tier 2 (267-534 feet) 267,818 2,057 34,877 230,884 15,000 15.4 21.5 3 3
Tier 3 (534-801 feet) 418,389 0 4,410 413,979 15,000 27.6 49.1 9 12
Tier 4 (801-1,000 feet) 462,301 0 0 462,301 15,000 30.8 79.9 9 21
Total 1,240,208 2,057 39,287 1,198,864 79.9 79.9 21 21
Table 4. Lake Elmo Shoreland Open Space Calculation
Tier
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Not Open Space
Net Open
Space
(sq.ft.)
% Open
Space Lots
(sq.ft.)
Street
Right-of-
Way
(sq.ft.)
Shore Impact Zone (0-37.5 ft) 0 0 0 0 NA
Total Shoreland Area 1,240,208 317,994 179,618 742,596 59.9
Memorandum – Updated Shoreland PUD Evaluation, The Royal Golf Club Residential Development
Revised February 6, 2017
Page 6
Table 5. Downs Lake Shoreland Density Evaluation
Tier
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Regulated
Wetlands
(sq.ft.)
Bluffs
(sq.ft.)
Net
Suitable
Area
(sq.ft.)
Required
Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Allowable
Base
Density
Cumulative
Allowable
Density
Proposed
Density
Cumulative
Proposed
Density
Tier 1 (0-320 feet) 0 0 0 0 20,000 0.0 0.0 0 0
Tier 2 (320-640 feet) 16,615 0 0 16,615 20,000 0.8 0.8 0 0
Tier 3 (640-1,000 feet) 321,718 27,364 0 294,354 20,000 14.7 15.5 3 3
Total 338,333 27,364 0 310,969 15.5 15.5 3 3
Table 6. Downs Lake Shoreland Open Space Calculation
Tier
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Not Open Space
Net Open
Space
(sq.ft.)
%
Open
Space
Lots
(sq.ft.)
Street
Right-of-
Way
(sq.ft.)
Shore Impact Zone (0-75 ft) 0 0 0 0 NA
Total Shoreland Area 338,333 27,048 78,225 233,060 68.9
Memorandum – Updated Shoreland PUD Evaluation, The Royal Golf Club Residential Development
Revised February 6, 2017
Page 7
Table 7. Lake Rose Shoreland Density Evaluation
Tier
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Regulated
Wetlands
(sq.ft.)
Bluffs
(sq.ft.)
Net
Suitable
Area
(sq.ft.)
Required
Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Allowable
Base
Density
Cumulative
Allowable
Density
Proposed
Density
Cumulative
Proposed
Density
Tier 1 (0-320 feet) 751,825 16,443 0 735,382 20,000 36.8 36.8 7 7
Tier 2 (320-640 feet) 418,474 0 0 418,474 20,000 20.9 57.7 12 19
Tier 3 (640-1,000 feet) 629,341 0 0 629,341 20,000 31.5 89.2 22 41
Total 1,799,640 16,443 0 1,783,197 89.2 89.2 41 41
Table 8. Lake Rose Open Space Calculation
Tier
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Not Open Space
Net Open
Space
(sq.ft.)
%
Open
Space
Lots
(sq.ft.)
Street
Right-of-
Way
(sq.ft.)
Shore Impact Zone (0-75 ft) 278,600 0 80,548 198,052 71.1
Total Shoreland Area 1,799,640 506,747 377,169 915,724 50.9
Memorandum – Updated Shoreland PUD Evaluation, The Royal Golf Club Residential Development
Revised February 6, 2017
Page 8
Table 9. Horseshoe Lake Shoreland Density Evaluation
Tier
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Regulated
Wetlands
(sq.ft.)
Bluffs
(sq.ft.)
Net
Suitable
Area
(sq.ft.)
Required
Lot Size
(sq. ft.)
Allowable
Base
Density
Cumulative
Allowable
Density
Proposed
Density
Cumulative
Proposed
Density
Tier 1 (0-320 feet) 140,400 0 0 140,400 20,000 7.0 7.0 2 2
Tier 2 (320-640 feet) 294,250 0 0 294,250 20,000 14.7 21.7 11 13
Tier 3 (640-1,000 feet) 451,662 12,032 0 439,630 20,000 22.0 43.7 22 35
Total 886,313 12,032 0 874,281 43.7 43.7 35 35
Table 10. Horseshoe Lake Open Space Calculation
Tier
Total
Area
(sq.ft.)
Not Open Space
Net Open
Space
(sq.ft.)
% Open
Space Lots
(sq.ft.)
Street
Right-of-
Way
(sq.ft.)
Shore Impact Zone (0-75 ft) 63,500 0 0 63,500 100.0
Total Shoreland Area 886,313 507,334 117,552 261,427 29.5
3/8/2017 FOCUS Engineering, Inc. Mail - Royal Golf Club Preliminary Plat/Plans
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=885060bd59&view=pt&search=sent&th=15aaf90ec913eabd&siml=15aaf90ec913eabd 1/1
Jack Griffin <jack.griffin@focusengineeringinc.com>
Royal Golf Club Preliminary Plat/Plans
1 message
Jack Griffin <jack.griffin@focusengineeringinc.com>Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 2:16 PM
To: Stephen Wensman <SWensman@lakeelmo.org>
Cc: Chad Isakson <Chad.Isakson@focusengineeringinc.com>
Stephen,
Please see the attached engineering review comments for the Royal Golf Club Preliminary Plat/Plans.
Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks ~Jack
John (Jack) W. Griffin, P.E.
Principal / Sr. Municipal Engineer
FOCUS ENGINEERING, INC.
651.300.4264
jack.griffin@focusengineeringinc.com
2017-03-08 RGC-Preliminary Plan Review.pdf
1505K
PAGE 1 of 5
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 8, 2017
To: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director Re: Royal Golf Club at Lake Elmo PUD
Cc: Emily Becker, City Planner Preliminary Plan Engineering Review
From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer
An engineering review has been completed for the Preliminary Plan submittal for the Royal Golf Club at Lake Elmo
PUD. The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Carlson‐McCain:
Royal Golf Club at Lake Elmo PUD Preliminary Plan Set, Sheets 1‐65, dated February 28, 2017.
Preliminary Phasing Plans, Sheets P1‐P3, dated February 20, 2017.
Lift Station Site Plans, dated February 28, 2017.
Stormwater Management Plan dated February 28, 2017.
Storm sewer design calculations dated February 28, 2017.
Landscape and Tree Preservation Plans were not reviewed by Engineering.
STATUS/FINDINGS: Engineering has prepared the following review comments:
All public improvements constructed to support the development must be designed and constructed in accordance
with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual available on the City website.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
Outlots B and T include City trails and should be dedicated to the City as part of the Plat. City o wnership has
been correctly identified on the Preliminary Plat Index Sheet.
Outlots E, H, M, N, V, W, AA, EE, GG, and HH include storm water ponds, infiltration basins, sanitary lift
stations and utility corridors that must be dedicated to the City as part of the Plat. City ownership has been
correctly identified on the Preliminary Plat Index Sheet.
Drainage and Utility easements must be granted over all of Outlots G, O, Q, Z, and II, and portions of Outlot
FF as part of the City’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System to protect the various wetlands, wetland
buffers and drainage systems. These Outlots will be HOA owned and maintained. These easements have
been correctly identified on the Preliminary Plat.
Outlots M, N and EE do not appear to be adequate for City owned/maintained lift stations. Preliminary Plat
approval should be contingent upon expanding Outlots M, N, and EE, or otherwise revising the Preliminary
Plat/Plans to the City’s satisfaction such that the proposed sanitary lift station sites are acceptable to the
City’s lift station consulting engineer and Public Works staff. It is recommended that the City’s lift station
consultant should complete preliminary site designs for each lift station for the applicant to incorporate
into the Preliminary Plat/Plans. The lift station sites require improved on‐site grades, better access and
FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc.
Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261
Jack Griffin, P.E. 651.300.4264
Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267
Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4283
PAGE 2 of 5
turnaround areas for daily maintenance routines, better on‐site screening and greater separation from
other utilities.
All emergency overflow elevations must be fully protected by drainage easement.
Drainage and utility easements are required over all storm sewer, sanitary sewer and watermain not located
on City Outlots and right‐of‐way, minimum 30‐feet in width, 15 feet from centerline on each side of pipe.
Easements must be shown on the Preliminary Plat, Utility Plans and Grading Plans. Easements have
generally been provided as required. Revisions may be necessary has the plans are finalized or additional
width may be required to adjust for greater pipe depths.
Written landowner permission must be submitted as part of the development applications for any storm
water discharges to adjacent properties to avoid negative impacts to downstream properties.
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
20th Street North dedicated right‐of‐way. As required, the Preliminary Plat dedicates 40 feet of right‐of‐way
to the City of Lake Elmo along the entire length of 20th Street North to provide a minimum R/W from the
existing roadway centerline.
Manning Trail North dedicated right‐of‐way. As required, the Preliminary Plat dedicates 50‐55 feet of right‐
of‐way to the City of Lake Elmo along the length of Manning Trail North within the City limits of Lake Elmo
to provide a minimum R/W from the existing roadway centerline.
Washington County dedicated right‐of‐way. The Plat must dedicate sufficient right‐of‐way along CSAH 17
(Lake Elmo A venue) and CSAH 1 0 (10th Street N orth) as m ay b e re quired by Washington County. Preliminary
Plat approval must be contingent upon the proposed right‐of‐way along CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue) and
CSAH 10 (10th Street North) being reviewed and approved by Washington County.
Access Management. Access to the development is proposed in seven locations accessing CSAH 17 (Lake
Elmo Avenue), CSAH 10 (10th Street North), 20th Street North (MSA collector street) in four locations, and
Manning Trail North.
Preliminary Plat approval must be contingent upon the City receiving written correspondence from
Washington County approving the proposed access locations at CSAH 17 and CSAH 10.
Street E access to 20th Street North (MSA Collector Street). Access is 550 feet east of Lake Elmo
Avenue vs. the required spacing of 660 feet. Proposed access location aligns with the existing
intersection for 20th Street Court N. and should cause no operational concerns.
Street J access to 20th Street North (MSA Collector Street). Proposed access is located 365 feet
offset from the existing intersection of Legion Avenue. The preferred access point would align with
the existing intersection for Legion Avenue, however the applicant has indicated site conditions at
t h e g o l f co u r s e p r o h i b i t i n g t h i s co n n e c t i o n . Th e of f s e t ha s be en reviewed by the City’s
transportation consultant and no concerns were identified with this location.
Golf Course Entrance. The existing entrance to the golf course from 20th Street North will be
maintained as part of the development. No secondary access to the Golf Course/Club House has
been proposed.
Street A a ccess to 2 0th Street N orth (MSA Collector S treet). A ccess is 650 feet west of Manning Trail
North. The location has been reviewed in the field and is an acceptable access location to 20th
Street North.
Street B access to Manning Trail North. Access is 550 feet south of 20th Street North. The location
has been reviewed in the field and is an acceptable access location to Manning Trail North.
Washington County Intersection Improvements. Preliminary Plat approval must be contingent upon the
developer constructing as part of the development project and at its sole cost all intersection improvements
recommended by Washington County. The preliminary plans show right and left turn lanes in each of these
intersections.
City Street Intersection Improvements. The City’s transportation consultant, SRF Consulting, reviewed the
transportation studies completed by the developer’s consultant, including the Traffic Impact Study and Turn
Lane Evaluation R eport, a nd has identified the need f or r ight t urn lanes at each of the access locations along
20th Street North, including the Golf Course entrance and including at the intersection of Manning Trail
PAGE 3 of 5
North. No turn lanes are required at the Manning Trail intersection with Street B. Preliminary Plat approval
must therefore be contingent upon the developer constructing as part of the project and at its sole cost
right turn lanes meeting City state aid design standards at Streets E, J, A, the Golf Course entrance, and
Manning Trail. The preliminary plans show right turn lanes in each of these locations as required.
RESIDENTIAL STREETS
The Preliminary Plat/Plans have addressed staff concerns regarding secondary access and street
interconnections.
All streets are proposed to be publically owned and maintained. Public streets must be designed to meet
the City’s Engineering Design Standards including R/W width (60‐feet), street width (28‐feet) and cul‐de‐
sac radii (60 foot radius R/W / 45 foot radius pavement), except as noted herein.
Surmountable concrete curb and gutter shall be installed in single family residential areas with future
driveways and B618 curb installed along entrance roadways and roadway stretches w ith no l ots/driveways.
Minimum street width for one‐way divided streets is 19 feet.
Street intersections must be at 90 degrees and maintain 50 feet of tangent with maximum slopes of 2.5%.
The City standard minimum horizontal curve radius is 90.
Maximum longitudinal grade is 8% with no sidewalks, 6% where there are sidewalks.
Six (6) foot sidewalks must be provided along all residential streets and as may be required by the City for
connectivity. Sidewalks are not shown along the cul‐de‐sac of Street A, or along Streets H and K.
Ten (10) foot utility easements are required on either side of all right‐of‐ways.
Exceptions to City standards being proposed are as follows:
Street C: The applicant is proposing no sidewalk along Street C. With no sidewalk the right‐of‐way
width can be narrowed to 50 feet.
Street D: The applicant is proposing a rural section road with ribbon curb along the southern
segment with no lots/driveways. Staff is acceptable to this exception if the revisions outlined below
can be accommodated.
Typical Street Sections must be revised on the Preliminary Plans as follows:
All typical sections must show boulevard trees on both sides of the street. Boulevard trees shall be
set back 5 feet from back of curb with trail/sidewalk and set back 8 feet from back of curb without
trail/sidewalk, unless otherwise noted below.
When applicable the typical sections should show boulevard trees in the center median areas.
Street C: Boulevard trees shall be set back 8 feet from the back of curb, shown on both sides.
Street D (STA 44+50 to 10th Street): Typical sections shall be revised as follows and right‐of‐way
widths adjusted as needed to comply with city standards.
The boulevard without trail/sidewalk shall extend 8 feet at 4% max. grade then transition
to 4:1 inslope. The boulevard tree shall be placed 5 feet from back of curb.
A minimum 2 foot shoulder at max. grade of 2% must be placed on the outside of the
trail/sidewalk prior to the 4:1 inslope.
GRADING PLAN, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND STORM SEWER SYSTEM
The site plan is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, VBWD and City rules and
regulations. Storm water and storm sewer facilities proposed as part of the site plan to meet State and
VBWD permitting requirements must be constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Design
Standards Manual available on the City website.
Preliminary Plan revisions may be necessary to comply.
Infiltration basin design must be based on actual soil borings and investigations to determine acceptable
design infiltration rates and basin locations. All infiltration basins shall be given a name corresponding to
the storm water model and that distinguishes the basin from a wet pond. The 100‐year HWL must be shown
on the preliminary plans.
Preliminary Plan revisions may be required to provide adequate infiltration.
PAGE 4 of 5
Label the Outlot M infiltration basin and provide the 100‐year HWL on the plans.
Label the Outlot EE and HH infiltration basins and provide the 100‐year HWL on the plans.
All storm water facilities, including infiltration basins, wetlands and wetland buffers, must be placed in
O u t l o t s d e e d e d to t h e C i t y fo r ma i n t e n a n c e pu r p o s e s . Th e S t o r m water Facility Outlots must fully
incorporate the 100‐year HWL, 10 foot maintenance bench and all maintenance access roads.
All lots must have the minimum floor elevation at least 2 feet above any adjacent 100‐year HWL and the
100‐year HWL shall not encroach onto any lot. When the 100‐year, 10‐day snow melt condition produces a
higher flood elevation than the 100‐year storm event, the higher flood condition shall be the flood level
placed on the plans and used for preliminary plan preparation including building low floor elevations and
lot encroachments.
The Downs Lake 100‐year HWL of 893.8 encroaches Lot 1, Block 3. The low floor elevations for Lots
1‐6, Block 3 must be raised to be a minimum of 2 feet higher than the 100‐year HWL.
The Downs Lake 100‐year HWL of 893.8 encroaches Lot 1‐5, Block 4. The low floor elevations for
Lots 2‐5, Block 4 must be raised to be a minimum of 2 feet higher than the 100‐year HWL.
The Wetland‐20 100‐year HWL of 909.2 continues to encroach Lots 19‐20, Block 18.
Pond 60 on Outlot V proposes storm water ponding over the existing dual gas pipeline and easement area.
It is the City’s understanding that this improvement will not be allowed as proposed and if allowed would
pose undue maintenance and ownership burden on the City. The plans should be revised to remove this
encroachment or the applicant must provide written correspondence to the City from the gas main utility
owner stating that the proposed improvements are acceptable as proposed including no ongoing
maintenance restrictions to the City.
Stormwater Ponds must be constructed meeting City standards. Stormwater Wet Ponds are required to
have a minimum of 3 feet in depth to the NWL, constructed with 3:1 side slopes and both a 10:1 aquatic
bench and a 10:1 maintenance bench. Designated maintenance access roads, 20 feet in width, must be
provided for all storm water facilities with slope no greater than 10%. Both the NWL and 100‐year HWL
must be shown on the plans.
The Typical Pond Section shown on sheet 61 must be replaced with the City’s Standard Typical Pond
Section detail.
Pond Maintenance access has not been provided to Infiltration Basin 20.
Pond 50 does not appear to be graded to City standards including the 10:1 aquatic bench and a
10:1 maintenance bench.
Pond 60 does not appear to be graded to City standards including the 10:1 aquatic bench and a
10:1 maintenance bench. Pond 60 maintenance access must be improved accordingly.
The 100‐year HWL must be calculated and placed on the plans for all rear yard catch basin areas. Drainage
and utility easements must be revised on the Preliminary Plans to fully protect the localized 100‐year HWL.
Overland emergency overflows or outlets will be required as part of the site plan. All emergency overflow
elevations must be fully protected by drainage easement.
The drainage swale along the rear yards of Lots 26‐28, Block 19 is not protected by easement. The swale
should be regraded to run closer to the rear lot lines, rather than within 10 feet of the building pads pf Lots
27 and 28.
The maximum curb run prior to a catch basin is 350 feet. Additional catch basins may be required.
The storm sewer system shall be designed to maintain the City standard minimum pipe cover of 3 feet.
Drain tile is required as part of the City standard street section at a ll l ocalized low points in the street. Drain
tile considerations may impact the storm sewer design and depth requirements at low points.
MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY
The Royal Golf Club development area (Tartan Park) was excluded from the 2030 Comprehensive Water
System Plan, being identified as an area to not be served by municipal water. However, municipal water
infrastructure exists immediately a d j a c e n t to T a r t a n Pa r k ( 1 6‐inch trunk watermain line has been
constructed along Lake Elmo Avenue).
PAGE 5 of 5
At the developer’s request, the City’s water system modeling consultant (AE2S) completed the Tartan Park
Water System Study to review and identify the expansion capabilities of the water system to service this
subdivision including a detailed analysis of the operating pressures, watermain pipe sizing and looping
requirements.
The water system study verified that once the 16‐inch trunk watermain connection is installed as part of
the Downtown Phase 2 Improvements between 30th Street and Upper 33rd Street, the water system can be
extended to serve the proposed development within Tartan Park without the need for additional
infrastructure such as pressure reduction valves or booster stations. Depending on the final development
design/layout, localized private booster pumps or pressure reduction valves may be needed for individual
structures or commercial uses.
The watermain distribution network and pipe sizing for this development should be constructed as shown
in Figure 1 of the AE2S water system study. This watermain network, including pipe sizes and looping
connections, has been correctly shown in the Preliminary Plans dated February 28, 2017.
The developer is responsible to provide the water system infrastructure to support the proposed
development. All water system infrastructure must be designed to meet City standards and constructed at
the developer’s cost.
Prior to connection permits being issued any non‐residential water users need to be better defined for the
City to confirm service capabilities.
MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER
At the developer’s request, the City recently amended the Comprehensive Plan to include the Royal Golf
Club development within the City’s designated Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA).
The developer is responsible to provide wastewater infrastructure to support the proposed development.
All sewer infrastructure must be designed to meet City standards and constructed at the developer’s cost.
The Preliminary Plat/Plans extend sewer service to the subdivision by constructing three new sanitary lift
stations to address the varied topography with the last lift station located on the south end of the Plat at
the new street access to 10th Street North. A 6‐inch HPDE forcemain is then extended from the lift station
along 10th Street to connect to the existing 16‐inch HPDE Lake Elmo Avenue sanitary forcemain.
The sanitary sewer system layout as proposed is generally acceptable. No pipe oversizing is required. The
sewer system has been designed with a gravity sewer stub extended to the south end of the Plat.
The lift station site plans submitted by the applicant indicate that the proposed lift station sites are too
small as proposed and will likely need to be enlarged to properly accommodate the proposed facilities
without added ownership and maintenance burden.
The lift station sites require improved on‐site grades, better access and turnaround areas for daily
maintenance routines, better on‐site screening and greater separation from other utilities. It is
recommended that the City’s lift station consultant complete preliminary site designs for each lift station
for the applicant to incorporate into the Preliminary Plat/Plans. The Preliminary Plat should be contingent
upon revised Outlot areas to accommodate each of the proposed sanitary lift station facilities.
Prior to connection permits being issued any non‐residential sewer users need to be better defined for the
City to confirm service capabilities.
GENERAL PLAN COMMENTS
The proposed trails should be centered within the 30 foot wide dedicated Outlots. A minimum 6 foot mow
strip must be reserved on both sides of the trail.
The grading plan indicates significant use of retaining walls. Retaining walls should be placed within private
lots and Outlots to the extent possible to be owned and maintained by the HOA.
Landscape Plans should be reviewed and revised to avoid planting conflicts. Tree plantings must remain
outside of utility easements, including the small utility corridor, and clear from all storm water maintenance
benches and access roads. Tree plantings must be offset a minimum of 10 feet from watermains, sanitary
sewer mains, and storm sewers, and offset a minimum of 5 feet from water/sewer services.
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,
AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Figure 1City of Lake ElmoNew Development Low Pressure Zone
¯
0 10.25 0.5 0.75
Miles
Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.
Division BetweenIntermediate Zone andLow Zone
Water Mains
Existing Pipes
12" New Developments
8" New Developments
16" Lake Elmo
8" Tartan Park
12" Tartan Park
Tower #3 Piping
Tower #3
12" New Developments
8" New Developments
Tartan Park
Hunters Crossing
PRV BetweenIntermediate Zone andLow Zone
Village Park Preserve
Easton Village
Water Tower #3
20th Street North
Horseshoe Lake
M
a
n
n
i
n
g
T
r
a
i
l
N
o
r
t
h
10th Street North
L a k e E l m o A v e n u e N o rt
h
The Royal Golf Club
Master Concept Plan
H.C. Golf Course Development LLC.
This graphic is an artist’s rendition for illustrative purposes only and is
.
1
2
7
4
8
12
11
10
13
14
15
16
18
17
9
53
6
City of Lake Elmo Planning Department
PUD Concept Plan Review
To: City Council
From: Ben Gozola, City Planner
Meeting Date: September 6, 2016
Applicants: HC Golf Course Development, LLC
Location: 11455 20th Street North
Introductory Information
Request: The applicants are seeking feedback on a PUD concept plan for redevelopment of the
Tartan Park Golf Course into the Royal Golf Club. As presented, the redevelopment
would include significant upgrades to the golf course itself, and the introduction of
residential housing on the periphery of the course and property.
NOTE: This Concept Plan phase of development is specifically designed as an avenue to
provide a developer with feedback on what steps must be taken to allow a proposed
development to proceed. The Planning Commission, City Council, and surrounding land
owners are asked to recognize that nothing is set in stone as of yet, and the design of this
development (if it moves forward) will be largely predicated on the feedback and direction
received at this stage of the development process.
Site Data: Existing Zoning – PF (Public Facility)
Land Use Guidance – Public/Park
Approximate Existing Parcel sizes – 159.01 acres, 74.84 acres, and 39.6 acres, 37.4
acres, 37.04 acres, 37.01 acers, 26.38 acres, and 13.25 acres (424.53 gross acres)
Property Identification Numbers (PIDs): 25-029-21-12-0001, 25-029-21-13-0001,
25-029-21-14-0001, 25-029-21-21-0001, 25-029-21-31-0001, 25-029-21-42-0001,
25-029-21-43-0001, and 25-029-21-43-0002
Various
Prelim Calcs
(in acres):
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA ........................................................477 gross acres
UPLAND (less open water) ..............................................≈ 424 acres
LAND WITHIN SHORELAND ..........................................≈ 206 acres
NON SHORELAND ..........................................................≈ 218 acres
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 2
(cont.) UPLAND SPECIFICALLY SET ASIDE FOR
RESIDNETIAL DEVELOPMENT .....................................≈ 205 acres
– WETLANDS ................................................................≈ 16 acres
– WETLAND BUFFERS ................................................≈ 9.75 acres
– BLUFFS ......................................................................≈ 0.75 acres
– ROW DEDICATIONS (func class rds) .......................≈ 3.5 acres
– OPEN WATER ............................................................≈ 1.5 acres
– ANTICIPATED TRAIL EASEMENTS .........................≈ 1.25 acres
NET RESIDENTIAL SITE AREA ......................................≈ 173 acres
– 40 acres of private open space would cut the actual developed land
down to approximately 133 acres; however, the Met Council
measures minimum net density by taking the minimum number of
planned housing units and dividing by the net acreage. Net acreage
does not include land covered by wetlands, water bodies, public
parks and trails, public open space, arterial road rights-of-way, and
other undevelopable acres identified in or protected by local
ordinances such as steep slopes.
TOTAL PROPOSED LOTS ...............................................301
Review
Initial
Background:
Applicant Comments on Background and Guiding Considerations: Tartan Park, 3M’s
private 27-hole golf course and recreational facility was purchased by HC Golf Course
Development, LLC in March of 2016. Since that time, the golf course reconstruction and
proposed clubhouse renovation have begun with an expected opening Summer of 2017.
The purpose of the Development Sketch review is to gain feedback on a proposed
concept to develop the remaining land, consisting of 205.66 gross acres, contained in
the 477 acre site.
The site has 17 different wetland basins. While the exact fill impacts to these are
unknown, it is suspected that the vast majority of “impacts” will by means of dredging
or deepening the basins to accommodate water quality measures and floodplain
creation. The applicant is keenly aware of the need to preserve and protect these
features and has designed the development proposal to allow for this.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 3
(cont.)
Of prime concern is the preservation of the vegetated surrounding road corridors.
Wooded buffers are maintained along all exterior boundaries of the site, maintaining the
character of the existing roads and providing buffers adjacent existing residential
development. In areas of wooded slopes, care has been taken to “ride the ridge” of
these features to minimize disruption and retain the beauty of these topographic
amenities. Extensive retaining walls are planned to further minimize grading impacts.
The need for a PUD is in large part driven by the fact that a significant portion of the
site is within Shoreland Districts created by Lake Elmo, Rose Lake, and Horseshoe
Lake. There is also an unnamed wetland (82-417W) in the NE portion of the site; this is
not on the DNR list of environmental lakes but shows up in the City’s Shoreland
regulations. This is currently being addressed. With this narrative, we are submitting
our analysis and basis for the DNR PUD for City review.
As mentioned, the site has many natural and man-made features that guide the form and
shape of the development and contribute to its beauty. These features also add design
constraints, particularly in the area vehicular circulation. To mitigate this, the plan
contemplates numerous access points and “forks” in the spline roads to minimize the
risk of an area being blocked from access in an emergency.
Staff Comments: The applicant correctly recognizes that the conceptual development
does not fit the current land use guidance or zoning for the property. This report
outlines a recommended process to follow if the community supports the concept, and
identifies ways the plans would need to be amended moving forward.
Comp Plan &
Zoning:
While all Cities do their best to plot out a vision for the future in a comprehensive plan,
the fact is that no plan is set in stone and there will always be factors which require a
community to rethink portions of a plan from time to time. The 3M Golf Course, Tartan
Park (founded in 1966), has been a fixture in Lake Elmo for half a century and was
therefore likely not a focal point of discussion during the last comprehensive plan
update. The sale of the property, its proposed redevelopment into a premiere golfing
venue, and the scale of the land in question (over 400 acres) is a unique event that begs
examination of the comprehensive plan guidance and zoning for the property to ensure
the land continues to thrive for another half-century.
Factors to consider:
Just over 200 acres of the approximately 477 acres that make up the old Tartan Park
Golf Course are in the Shoreland district. This land also includes roughly 17 acres
of wetlands and bluff lands, so from an environmental standpoint, the City has ample
reason to consider unique ways to protect this land that may or may not exist in
today’s regulatory framework.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 4
(cont.)
The land is situated just north of 10th Street along Lake Elmo Aveune, and is
directly adjacent to the new sewer line recently installed to service the Old Village.
This places the acreage directly north of the portion of the City guided for
urbanization, and south of the old Village which is guided for limited and specialized
urban growth.
Single family neighborhoods currently exist adjacent to this property to the north and
southwest at the following densities:
o The Homestead: 18 homes on approximately 38 acres (0.47 u.p.a.)
o Tartan Meadows: 39 homes on approximately 73.3 acres (0.53 u.p.a.)
o Legion Lane/Legion Avenue (“Eden Park” per a speaker at the public hearing):
47 units on approximately 52.2 acres (0.9 u.p.a.)
The Homestead appears to be an old OP development (clustering homes on smaller
lots to preserve open space), while Tartan Meadows and Eden Park are old Rural
Single-Family developments.
Based upon buildable land:
o As an OP development (if zoning were to allow for it), the land as a whole could
ostensibly support upwards of 170+ units if the entire property was developed
for residential purposes (half the acreage still preserved as open space, shared
communal septic facilities, etc).1
o As a low-density urbanized development (if zoning were to allow for it), the
developable land minus land needed for the golf course could ostensibly support
upwards of 600+ units.2
o If the Rural Single Family land use guidance and RS zoning were amended to
allow new areas to utilize both designations, the developable land minus land
needed for the golf course could ostensibly support upwards of 115 unsewered
units OR 310+ sewered units.3
1 After factoring in open water, wetlands, bluffs, func class road dedications etc, we estimate approximately 377 acres would b e
available to support an OP development. 377/40 = 9.425*18 = 169 units.
2 After factoring in open water, wetlands, bluffs, func class road dedications, AND the land for the golf course, we estimate
approximately 173 acres would be available to support an LDR development. 173*3.5 = 605 units.
3 After factoring in open water, wetlands, bluffs, func class road dedications, AND the land for the golf course, we estimate
approximately 173 acres would be available to support an RS development. 173 acres/1.5 = 115 unsewered units. 173 acres *
43,560 sq ft/acre = 7,535,880 sq ft / 24,000 sq ft per sewered lot = 313 sewered units
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 5
(cont.)
While an OP scenario would result in an overall residential density similar to the
adjacent Homestead and Tartan Meadows neighborhoods, such a direction would
mean the complete elimination of one of the City’s defining features (the golf
course). Comparatively, taking the full next step to allow for urbanized low density
development as would be expected south of 10th Street would clearly allow for a
level of development that would likely be out-of-place in the context of the
surrounding areas.
The extension of sewer to existing developments along Lake Elmo Avenue will very
likely happen over time as individual and/or community septic systems fail and
neighborhoods request hook-ups. Given the amount of Shoreland district and
wetlands on the subject property, hooking new residential units up to sewer appears
to make sense.
Based on all of the factors above, staff believes there is ample reason for the City to
consider comprehensive plan and zoning updates at this time to accommodate a
proposed development on the subject property.
Would this change be considered “Spot Zoning?”
One concern that has already been voiced is whether a change on this property could
be considered “spot zoning.” To address this matter up front, staff requested the
City Attorney provide guidance on this question to the Commission and Council. In
summary, it was determined this would not quality as spot zoning for a number of
reasons:
1. The term “spot zoning” typically refers to changes on small pieces of land (i.e
one or two acres). The fact that the city is examining the use of 477 acres
immediately differentiates this action from what is typically considered spot
zoning.
2. In order to be spot zoning, all four of the following criteria must be met:
a. The rezoning must be unsupported by any rational basis relating to
promoting the public health and welfare
In this case, extending sewer to the area arguably accommodates two
community goals: it allows for sustainment and redevelopment of a long-
standing community destination, and sewer in general is a major tool in
protecting the long-term public health and welfare.
b. The rezoning must establish a use classification that is inconsistent with the
surrounding uses, and
c. The rezoning creates an island of nonconforming use within a larger zoned
district.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 6
(cont.)
In this case, the surrounding areas are residential, and the subject property
would also be zoned for residential use. While densities would likely be
different, this would simply become the fourth amongst three different
residential districts which already exist in the area.
d. The rezoning must dramatically reduce the value for uses specified in the
zoning ordinance of either the rezoned plot or abutting property.
In this case, a rezoning will most definitely increase the value of the rezoned
property. Regarding surrounding property, the use is not going to change (it
is a golf course today and it will be a golf course in the future). The
significant investments being placed into the property along with the
extension of available sewer lines for future hook-ups if needed should also
bring added value to surrounding areas.
Bottom line, it appears that any challenge against the City’s ability to consider
the comprehensive plan and zoning designations for the Tartan Park land would
be very difficult to uphold. Staff finds the City has every right to consider what
is best for this land and make changes as needed at this time to accommodate the
desired outcome.
Decision #1:
The first thing the City Council must determine is whether taking action on a
comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning is warranted at this time given
changes that have occurred since the current plan and zoning map were last adopted.
The City has its greatest amount of decision-making discretion when it comes to the
comprehensive plan, so there isn’t necessarily a wrong answer. Per the reasons
above, staff believes the City DOES has ample reason to consider and debate
this request at this time.
o If the City Council disagrees with staff’s assessment and finds that no changes
to the comprehensive plan are warranted, no further assessment of this concept
plan is necessary and Council may deny the concept plan application without
further analysis of the plan details.
o If Council concurs with staff’s assessment and believes this is the right time to
consider the proper land use guidance and zoning for the former Tartan Park
land, then continuing the review outlined in this report is the proper next step.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 7
(cont.)
Decision #2:
If a comp plan change and rezoning is being considered, the next question is what will
be the appropriate designations to achieve the desired outcomes. For the purposes of
this report, staff is assuming the desired outcomes expressed by the applicant will be
generally in the realm of the outcomes desired by the City. If the City Council
ultimately has a different vision for the land, the pathways to achieve such a vision may
be drastically different than what is outlined below.
In general, staff believes there are three (3) directions the City could go to accommodate
the type of development being proposed.
OPTION #1: Creation of a new land use designation and new zoning classification.
Pros: allowable density and ultimate zoning standards can be tailored specifically
for this large developable area
Cons: Costly and time consuming solution. The first decision, how to craft a land
use designation, may take upwards of 1 – 2 months followed by a zoning code
update which could take an additional 2 – 3 months. Not the best solution if a
similar outcome can be achieved through other means.
OPTION #2: Guiding the land for Urban Low Density development.
Pros: Proximity to planned urban development south of 10th Street makes this area
a logical extension for that land use type.
Cons: The minimum density of residential housing required in the Urban Low
Density is too high for this land; neither the applicant nor the Council are
anticipated to want 3.5+ units per acre in this area of the community.
OPTION #3: Guiding the land for Village Urban Low Density development.
Pros: The allowable density range for Village Urban Low Density (1.5 to 2.5 units
per acre) would likely fit the proposed residential area and would not require
significant changes to the comprehensive plan. Additionally, conditioning approval
of the amendment(s) and rezoning on an acceptable PUD being approved would
maintain the City’s authority over what is ultimately built.
Cons: As a very minor con (in staff’s opinion), the comp plan would need to
recognize that existing development adjacent to the sewer pipe along Lake Elmo
Avenue would be treated as a “Village Transition” area. While definitely a new
concept, staff would argue this is simply a reality that hasn’t been given a name as
of yet. The land between 10th Street and the Old Village along Lake Elmo Avenue is
largely developed utilizing on-site or community septic systems. As these systems
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 8
(cont.) fail and replacement sites become harder to identify, it is highly likely that requests
to hook into the municipal system will become the norm throughout this corridor. A
new “Village Transition” area would recognize this as an area where sewer could
POTENTIALLY be extended to existing homes for environmental purposes, or to
new developments if such extensions were deemed necessary to protect the public
health and welfare (i.e. in the case of the Royal Golf Club, to protect a significant
amount of acreage within the Shoreland Overlay District). Extension of sewer
would ultimately be subject to its availability (direct connections to the force main
will not work) and other conditions we would build into the plan.
Given the pros and cons of the three options outlined above, staff would
recommend the City pursue Option #3 if it wishes to help facilitate the proposed
development.
Of the approximately 1100 acres between 10th Street and the Old Village, over ⅓ is
being considered by the subject application. Given the presumed desire of the
community to preserve & enhance the golf course along with the need to protect the
shorelands and wetlands on the property, this is clearly a unique situation that can be
distinguished from other development opportunities that exist in this same corridor.
This approach proactively recognizes the potential for sewer hook-ups in this
corridor that would be considered if it is in the public’s best interest to do so (and
such requests will undoubtedly be made in the coming decades).
Adjusting density ranges within the comp plan is avoided with this methodology as
the Village Urban Low Density classification could be used within the “Village
Transition” area when identified circumstances exist (i.e. sewer hookups are needed
by existing development for environmental reasons, developable land must be served
by sewer as part of a PUD to best protect area shorelands and wetlands, etc).
The decision of which course of action to follow will guide the specific edits that will be
needed to the comprehensive plan. Once staff has been given direction, we will begin
drafting recommended changes for consideration by the Planning Commission, Public,
and City Council.
PUD Standards Review
PUD Objective:
According to Section 154.751, the City must “…consider whether one or more of the
objectives [listed in this section] will be served or achieved.” Ten potential objectives
may be used to support a potential PUD. The applicant’s comments on their guiding
considerations can be seen on pages 2 & 3 of this report.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 9
(cont.)
Staff comment: The proposed development appears to meet a number of the City’s
identified objectives for PUDs:
Allowing the development to operate in concert with a redevelopment plan in certain
areas of the City and to ensure the redevelopment goals and objectives will be
achieved. Facilitating redevelopment of the golf course is clearly an objective for
a PUD.
Preservation and enhancement of important environmental features through careful
and sensitive placement of buildings and facilities. Utilization of open space in the
golf course for stormwater management, clustering of homes to limit overall
disturbance on the site, and extending sewer service for the proposed homes are
all ways the PUD would seek to preserve and enhance environmental features
within the area.
Coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater
compatibility with the development and surrounding land uses. The proposal
references four-sided architectural requirements ensuring that the front of
homes is not the only visually-desirable side of a home to look at.
Innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given
parcel than conventional approaches. Protecting environmental features and
enhancing the existing golf course will likely only be achievable through a
specialized development process
Provision of more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational
amenities and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under
conventional land development techniques. The PUD will facilitate the
preservation and enhancement of the golf course which would likely otherwis e
not happen.
Given that only one (1) objective must be met before a PUD can be requested, it appears
there is ample reason for the City to consider this request.
Land Area: According to Section 154.753(A), a PUD must include a minimum of 5 acres for
undeveloped land or 2 acres for developed land;
Staff comment: The development is proposed on approximately 424 gross acres. The
concept plan appears to meet this criteria.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 10
Open Space:
(cont.)
According to Section 154.753(B), a PUD must preserve “…at least 20% of the project
area not within street rights-of-way…” in protected open space. “Other public or site
amenities may be approved as an alternative to this requirement…Land reserved for storm
water detention facilities and other required site improvements may be applied to this
requirement.”
Staff comment: The development is proposing to create and enhance a public golf course
to preserve open space on roughly 50% of the land being developed which is an acceptable
option to proceed per the City’s PUD ordinance. Focusing solely on the 205 acres
proposed to be used for residential development, approximately 33% of that land area is
intended to be preserved open space around wetlands, bluffs, open water, and private open
space. The concept plan appears to meet the open space criteria.
Street Layout: According to Section 154.753(C), streets in a PUD “…shall be designed to maximize
connectivity in each cardinal direction, except where environmental or physical
constraints make this infeasible. All streets shall terminate at other streets, at public land,
or at a park or other community facility, except that local streets may terminate in stub
streets when those will be connected to other streets in future phases of the development
or adjacent developments.”
Staff comment: The development includes streets in each direction, but the future
preliminary plan will need to include modifications to the proposed roadway and trail
network before staff can recommend approval of the design. Please see page 15 and the
report section on “Streets and Transportation” for complete details. With changes, the
future PUD could meet this criteria.
Density: According to Section 154.754, a PUD “…may provide for an increase in density of
residential development by up to 20% of that allowed in the base zoning district.”
Staff comment: An analysis of whether a density increase would be necessary cannot be
completed until a decision is made on whether and how to amend the comprehensive plan
to allow for redevelopment of this land. That said, we estimate based on the current
concept plan that the proposed density is currently around 1.74 units per acre4 (which
would fall within the allowed density range for Village Urban Low Density development
per the current comprehensive plan). No request for a density increase is anticipated.
Lot Design:
Applicant Comments on Land Uses and Lot Sizes: The development contemplates
detached, single family homes encompassing a broad range of lifestyles choices and price
4 205.66 acres – 1.33 acres for Manning Ave – 2.33 acres for Lake Elmo Ave – 15.99 acres of wetlands – 9.74 acres of wetland
buffers – 1.34 acres of open water – 1.21 acres of trail easement = 172.99 acres for 301 units = 1.74 units/acre
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 11
(cont.)
points. Anticipated homes will range from low maintenance villa products to high-end
homes. The locations of these products are largely determined by adjacent natural
features and proximity to the golf course. While we generally know where these uses will
occur (as illustrated on the sketch plan), as grading and development plans progress more
details will emerge.
Presently we are consulting with various custom builders to determine exact lot sizes and
widths. At this point we know that traditional single family lots will range from 80’ – 100’
in width with minimum depths anticipated to be 140’. As mentioned above, the exact
location of these lots will be determined by adjacent amenities, views, orientation, etc..
Front setbacks will be a minimum of 30’, rear setback will be 35’ and side setbacks at 15’
each side (30’ between homes)
The “villa” product will range in size from 55’ – 65’ in width. These will be located on
private, HOA maintained streets. The front setback is expected to be 30’ from curb, 7.5’
from each side (15’ between homes).
Staff comment: Given that this is a proposed PUD, multiple styles and sizes of lots are
anticipated. Most important from a City perspective are on-going and future maintenance
concerns that involve the City (i.e. street plowing, street reconstruction, utility
replacements, etc.), and the look/feel of the proposed housing areas from other
surrounding lands in Lake Elmo. As the development progresses, the applicant will need
to address engineering concerns about roadway design and future maintenance (very
likely through elimination of private roads and adherence to adopted City standards), and
show how berming and/or plantings along with four-sided architecture will help to
alleviate visual impacts to adjacent lands.
Structures /
Builders:
Applicant Comments on Builders: Builders for the development have not been chosen.
Presently we are considering a pool of 5-7 custom builders for the traditional homes and
2 custom home builders for the villa product.
Staff comment: Moving forward, the applicant should be prepared to provide elevation
drawing examples of the various product types so Council, the Commission, and public
know what can be expected in the various portions of the proposed development.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 12
In General
Adjacent
parcel dev.:
Roads surrounding the proposed development largely create natural buffers between
this development and surrounding developable lands, but the two parcels marked
with stars in the graphic below deserve consideration as the development plans for
this area are drawn up. Further comments below.
The four numbered circles identify connections that either must be made or should
be considered moving forward:
#1: As will be discussed in detail in the transportation section of this report, it will
be critical that each neighborhood be connected to at least two peripheral roads.
Providing a link between these two neighborhoods (within circle #1) would be one
option to address access concerns on the west side of the development.
#2: Whenever possible, alignment of roads is far preferred to off-set intersections
like the one currently proposed, and the proposed off-set may not meet City access
management guidelines. Aligning the proposed road with Legion Avenue North is
recommended.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 13
(cont.)
#3: The seventy-five homes in the NE of the proposed development currently have
only one exit point on to Manning Trail. A connection to 20th Street will be needed.
#4: It is highly advised that the applicants find a way to complete a connection for
this development down to 10th Street in the area of Circle #4. If agreement cannot
be reached with the neighboring landowner, usable right-of-way to the neighboring
property must still be provided to facilitate a future road connection. If a connection
to 10th Street is not feasible at this time, two things will need to occur:
(A) The connection in Circle #1 must be completed to give the 169 homes
proposed in this area a secondary outlet
(B) Any future submittal will need to include a ghost plat of the adjacent property
showing how the proposed dead-end right-of-way alignment can be
successfully utilized to eventually facilitate a connection to 10th Street.
Connections to The Homestead and Tartan Meadows are not feasible due to lack of
right-of-way in both developments.
Buffers: There are no specific buffer requirements for PUDs, but the applicant should be
prepared to show berms, landscaping, and/or other features as may be necessary to
soften the transition between current golf course property and adjacent residential
areas.
Buffers were a major concern expressed by speakers at the public hearing and by the
Planning Commission.
Lot Access: Per the sketch plan, a majority of lots would have direct access to a public road, but
nearly one-third of all parcels (107) are proposed to access off of private roads. The
applicant indicated verbally during the Planning Commission meeting that future
submittals would show all roads as public meeting City standards.
Driveways should be located so as to preserve existing trees in as much as possible.
Addresses for the individual homes should be posted at each driveway entrance.
Future parcel
development:
The proposed subdivision would fully divide the property until/unless the golf
course use was discontinued and the land redeveloped.
Easements: All standard drainage and utility easements will need to be shown on the future
preliminary plan document(s).
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 14
All easements intended for public utilities shall be a minimum of 15 feet on each side
of the utility and shall be shown on the future plans. All easements will be as wide as
necessary to address access and/or maintenance objectives.
Landscaping: Any future preliminary PUD submittal shall provide documentation as may be
necessary to show compliance to City landscaping standards (including but not limited
to entrance monuments, boulevard plantings, plantings in private open space, etc).
Trails: ROW dedications along 10th Street, Lake Elmo Avenue and 20th Street must be
sufficient enough to accommodate trails as shown on the City’s Comprehensive Parks
& Recreation Plan’s map of Trails and Greenways (Map 11). If trails within the rights-
of-way are not feasible, off-road trail easements must be identified for dedication as
part of the final development plans.
An internal trail system linking the proposed neighborhoods should be explored and
incorporated into future plans if feasible. Indications as to whether sidewalks will be
provided should also be noted.
Golf course trails, if not accessible to the general public without a paid fee to be on
the course, will not be credited towards required park dedication.
Resident
Concerns:
Written comments received leading up to the planning commission meeting are
attached to this report. As of 8/15/16, a majority of the written feedback centered on
the need for a trail along 20th Street.
A lack of buffering was raised by a non-resident landowner in West Lakeland
Township. Lake Elmo code does not include buffering requirements from adjacent
jurisdictions.
A summary of public feedback from the planning commission public hearing can be
found on page 28 of this report.
Infrastructure
In General: All public improvements constructed to support the development must be designed
and constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual
available on the City website.
The Engineer’s memo is attached to this report for reference. The following is a
melding of Planning and Engineering feedback relating to the proposed infrastructure
within this development.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 15
Streets and
Transportation:
(cont.)
Applicant Comments on Streets and Trails: With the exception of the private streets
for the villa product, streets are anticipated to be 28’ feet (back of curb to back of curb)
within a 60’ right-of-way. The exact locations of sidewalks and trails have yet to be
determined but sidewalks will generally be placed on one side of the street. Trails will
connect neighborhoods to the golf course as we see this development working as a “golf
cart” community emphasizing the clubhouse, exercise facility, youth course and pool as
part of the community amenity. Additional trails will be planned as further City review
moves forward.
Discussions with County officials will begin as soon as we receive feedback from the
City. A Transportation Study has been initiated and will be included as part of the EAW,
which has also begun. When complete, we expect to review the traffic counts to
determine what intersection improvements will be needed on Lake Elmo Boulevard,
20th, and Manning Trail.
NOTE: As indicated throughout this revised report, the applicant verbally stated at the
Planning Commission public hearing that all future roads would be public and be
designed to conform to City standards. Analysis herein regarding private roads is still
relevant should the applicant’s elect to propose such again in the future.
Staff Comments:
In General. The national Complete Streets Coalition states that well‐designed,
connected Street Networks are the backbone upon which communities are built. Good
street network designs reduce land consumption, provide greater accessibility through
more direct routes, and increase overall network efficiency and reliability through
added redundancy. They also affect several factors that relate to building more
sustainable communities such as travel patterns, road safety, and public health.
Generally speaking, more compact and connected street networks tend to have
significantly higher levels of people walking and biking and fewer vehicle miles
traveled as compared to sparser, tree‐like designs. Connected streets can reduce traffic
congestion by dispersing traffic and offering travel options. Grid networks create a
safer road system.
ROW Dedications. The Plat must dedicate right‐of‐way to the City of Lake Elmo
along the entire length of 20th Street N. (40 feet R/W) and Manning Trail N. (50 feet
R/W) to provide a minimum R/W from the existing roadway centerline. The concept
plan shows R/W dedication, however the actual right‐of‐way width cannot be verified
based on the plan scale provided. The Plat must also dedicate sufficient right‐of‐way
along CSAH 17 (Lake Elmo Avenue), CSAH 10 (10th Street North), and CSAH 15
(Manning Avenue) as required by Washington County. The concept plan shows this
dedication, however the actual right‐of‐way widths must be reviewed and approved
by the County.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 16
(cont.)
Access Management. Access to the development is proposed in four locations: one
access onto Lake Elmo Avenue, two access points onto 20th Street North (MSA
collector street), and one access onto Manning Trail North.
It is strongly recommended that additional access points and interconnections be
thoroughly pursued to enhance the street network safety and accessibility. The
proposed concept plan shows three separate neighborhoods all requiring direct access
to a collector or County roadway without interconnection or secondary roadway
connection. Area 1 proposes 170 lots with a single point of access to CSAH 17 (Lake
Elmo Avenue). The 170 lots are placed along a dead end cul‐de-sac over 4,500 feet
long. The city standard cul‐de‐sac length is 600 feet while many communities have a
maximum length of 1,000 feet. Area 2 proposes 57 lots with two points of access to
20th Street N. Area 3 proposes 76 lots with a single point of access to Manning Trail
placed along a dead end cul‐de‐sac over 2,300 feet long.
An interconnection between Street A and Street E is extremely important to
provide a secondary access for Area 1 to 20th Street N., and to provide a secondary
access roadway connection for Area 2 to CSAH 17. A box culvert or bridge
structure should be investigated.
The south end of Street E should be connected to 10th Street N. to eliminate a
proposed cul‐de‐sac over 7.5 times the maximum allowed length. Staff recognizes
that this connection may be difficult to make but all efforts should be pursued. If
a connection cannot be physically made, any and all other emergency access
options or future connection opportunities must be addressed (i.e. a trail
connection to 10th Street to be used for emergency and future roadway
construction purposes, right‐of‐way dedication to the edge of the plat for a future
roadway connection, loop the south end of Street E to connect to Street H, etc).
Street J should be align to connect to both 20th Street N. and Manning Trail to
provide access to two separate collector roadways. If this is found to be unfeasible
then two connections to Manning Trail should be made to eliminate the long dead
end cul‐de‐sac.
Prior to the City receiving and accepting a preliminary plat proposal it is
recommended that all development access points be reviewed and approved by the
City and Washington County to verify acceptable access management spacing and
adequate sight triangles for each entrance. The proposed access locations and
considerations for the development are as follows:
1) Street E access to Lake Elmo Avenue (CSAH 17). Location to be approved by
Washington County.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 17
(cont.)
2) Street A access to 20th Street North (MSA collector roadway). Access is 550
feet east of Lake Elmo Avenue vs. the required spacing of 660 feet. Proposed
access location aligns with the existing intersection for 20th Street Court N.
3) Street B access to 20th Street North (MSA collector roadway). Proposed access
is located 350 feet offset from the existing intersection of Legion Avenue.
Consideration should be given to relocating this access to align with the
intersection of Legion Avenue or increase the offset to 660 feet.
4) Street J access to Manning Trail North. Access is 550 feet south of 20th Street
N. Location needs to be reviewed in the field to verify access as an acceptable
location.
Pedestrian Facilities. The following pedestrian improvements must be considered
when preparing preliminary plat documents:
The City should review potential bituminous trail requirements to be incorporated
along CSAH 17, 20th Street N. and/or Manning Trail N. to improve pedestrian
safety and work toward future trail connectivity.
Per the City Engineer, six (6) foot sidewalks must be provided along all residential
streets and as may be required for connectivity.
Private Streets. Private owned HOA streets have been proposed in areas of this
development including Streets D, F, I and K. Privately owned HOA streets should
not be allowed. Typically private streets are proposed for the purpose of decreasing
street and boulevard design standards including setbacks for the structures. The City
design standards have been established as “minimums” for the purpose of serving as
public access, drainage, sanitary sewer, and municipal water service. The boulevard
corridor also provides a dedicated location for small utilities such as gas, electric,
cable, telephone and fiber optics. Reducing the R/W width and structure setbacks
greatly increases the public cost for maintaining underground utilities by constricting
work zone areas when the infrastructure requires maintenance and/or replacement.
Private streets will only be considered when public infrastructure is not installed
below the private streets.
Streets (in general). Unless utilities are to be located elsewhere, all streets must be
shown as public streets when submitting for preliminary plat. All public streets must
be designed to meet the City’s Engineering Design Standards including R/W width
(60‐feet), street width (28‐feet) and cul‐de‐sac radii.
Surmountable concrete curb and gutter shall be installed in sin gle family
residential areas with future driveways and B618 curb installed along entrance
roadways and roadway stretches with no lots.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 18
(cont.)
Street intersections must approximate 90 degrees and maintain 50 feet of tangent
with maximum slopes of 2.5%. Residential maximum longitudinal grade is 8%
with no sidewalks, 6% where there are sidewalks.
Parkway or divided roadways must be a minimum of 18 feet wide from back or
curb to back of curb. The development street plan indicates landscaped medians at
two of the development entrance points.
Ten (10) foot utility easements are required on either side of all right‐of‐ways.
Other Responsibilities. Other transportation related improvements that will fall to
the developer include:
The applicant will be responsible to construct all intersection and turn lane
improvements along CSAH 17 as required by Washington County. These
improvements must be completed at the developer’s cost.
The applicant will be responsible to construct right and left turn lane improvements
along 20th Street N (both access locations) and long Manning Trail as required by
the City. These improvements must be completed at the developer’s cost.
UPDATE: Since the Planning Commission report was penned, the City has also received
the following comments from Washington County:
The Regional Functional Classification of CSAH 17/Lake Elmo Avenue is an "A"
Minor Arterial Roadway. The Washington County Comprehensive Plan 2030,
identifies 150 feet for the future right-of-way requirement along this section of
roadway. Currently, the right-of-way varies but ultimately, there should be 75 feet
from the centerline of the roadway.
The proposed access points on CSAH 17/Lake Elmo Avenue are acceptable to the
County. Transportation staff is currently reviewing the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) as
part of the environmental review process and will be coordinating the recommended
roadway improvements as this development is processed through the city. Once more
specific development plans are prepared, the County will review the specific plans
prior to the issuance of Washington County Access and Right Of Way permits.
The City should consider requiring that the two neighborhoods along the eastern edge
of the site be connected and access be provided to 10th Street on the south.
A Right Of Way permit will be required for any work in the CSAH 15/Manning
Avenue right-of-way as it relates to the development. A plan set is required with the
application and include any grading, installation of culverts, installation of water and
sewer services, left and right turn lanes on CSAH 15/Manning Avenue, parallel trail
grading, signage and any landscaping and other improvements within county right-of-
way.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 19
Water
System(s):
The application and sketch plans do not address water supply; however, it is staff’s
understanding that the intent is to serve the proposed development with municipal
water.
Tartan Park, the proposed development area, is excluded from the 2030
Comprehensive Water System Plan, being identified as an area to not be served by
municipal water. However, municipal water infrastructure exists immediately
adjacent to Tartan Park (16‐inch trunk watermain line has been constructed along
Lake Elmo Avenue).
If municipal water is extended to serve this development, a water service capacity and
hydraulic study must be completed to verify system capacity, operating pressures, and
water main pipe sizing and looping requirements. For example, it may be necessary
to move up the construction timeframe for the new water tower to be located in the
city’s lower pressure zone. Also, given the varied topography of the site it may be
necessary to identify acceptable water pressure operating conditions based on the
varied elevations to establish areas that will require pressure regulating valves for
individual homes.
The applicant would be responsible to extend municipal water into the development
at its cost, and would be required to construct a looped watermain network based on
the results of the water service hydraulic study.
Sanitary
System(s):
The applicant is responsible to provide wastewater infrastructure to support the
proposed development.
All sewer infrastructure must be provided at the developer’s cost.
The application and sketch plans do not address sanitary sewer service; however, it is
staff’s understanding that the intent is to serve the proposed development with
municipal sewer.
The proposed development is located outside of the City designated Municipal Urban
Service Area (MUSA) for sanitary sewer service. In order to extend municipal sewer
to serve this development, a Comprehensive Plan amendment is required to alter the
sewer service boundaries for the City.
Sewer service could be provided by constructing a lift station at the south end of
Tartan Park with a forcemain constructed along 10th Street N. to connect to the
existing 16‐inch forcemain along Lake Elmo Avenue. The sewer system should be
designed so that the 10th Street lift station can be eliminated in the future when gravity
sanitary sewer is extended to serve Cimarron and Oakland Junior High School.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 20
Interior to the development multiple lift stations may be required due to the varied
topography of the property. The sewer system must be designed City standards and
must minimize lift stations and future ongoing operational costs.
Storm water
/Grading:
Staff Comments:
The site plan is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, VBWD and
City rules and regulations.
Storm water and storm sewer facilities proposed as part of the site plan to meet State
and VBWD permitting requirements must be constructed in accordance with the City
Engineering Design Standards Manual available on the City website. The plans shown
do not meet many of these requirements.
All storm water facilities, including infiltration basins, wetlands and wetland buffers,
must be placed in
Outlots deeded to the City for maintenance purposes. The Stormwater Facility Outlots
must fully incorporate the 100‐year HWL, 10 foot maintenance bench and all
maintenance access roads. It appears that some of the proposed ponding facilities are
located outside of the development limits.
All storm water bonds must have both a 10:1 aquatic bench and a 10:1 maintenance
bench.
Designated maintenance access roads, 20 feet in width, must be provided for all storm
water facilities with slope no greater than 10%.
The maximum curb run prior to a catch basin is 350 feet.
All storm sewer pipe easements must be a minimum 30‐feet in width. Additional width
may be required to adjust for greater pipe depths.
The storm sewer system shall be designed to maintain the City standard minimum
pipe cover of 3 feet.
Drain tile is required as part of the City standard street section at all localized low
points in the street.
Drain tile considerations may impact the storm sewer design and depth requirements
at low points.
The general drainage system should mimic the natural topography of the site in order
to ensure a drainage system that provides positive storm water drainage across the
development.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 21
(cont.)
Overland emergency overflows or outlets will be required as part of the site plan.
Storm water pond facilities should be combined together to the greatest extent possible
to ensure adequate hydrology for efficient facility treatment operations.
The ultimate discharge rate and location will be an important consideration to avoid
negative impacts to downstream properties. The storm water management plan will
need to address changes to the downstream drainage system to the extent alterations
are proposed. To the extent adjacent properties are impacted, written permission from
those properties must be submitted as part of the development applications.
The grading plan indicates significant use of retaining walls. Retaining walls should
be placed within private lots or Outlots to be owned and maintained by the HOA.
Retaining walls should be placed on City R/W or Outlots dedicated to the City.
Retaining walls should also not be placed within lot drainage and utility easements.
Washington County Comments:
The developer or the city must submit the drainage report and calculations to our office
for review of any downstream impacts to the county drainage system. Along with the
drainage calculations, we will request written conclusions that the volume and rate of
stormwater run-off into the county right-of way will not increase as part of the project.
Development
Phasing:
Applicant Comments: The anticipated phasing of the project will be generally in a west
to east manner due to sewer and water considerations. The number of phases will be
determined by market demand and absorption. Presently we anticipate a 3-5 year build
out (60 units a year) although this might be slightly longer considering the increased
length of time to build custom homes.
A detailed phasing plan should be provided with the preliminary plat application that
clearly indicates the phasing of the construction for each public infrastructure
component and addresses both construction access to the site and public access for
new residents. Temporary cul‐de‐sacs should be part of the phasing plans and are be
required for any street with a platted lot with driveway access.
Additional phasing plan information as may be needed must also be provided to
demonstrate that stormwater management requirements will be met with each phase
of the project.
Certain transportation improvements may need to be constructed as part of the first
phase of the project regardless of their location. Staff will work with the applicant
moving forward to identify all such requirements.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 22
Utilities: All public utilities and facilities such as gas, electrical, sewer, and water supply
systems to be located in the flood plain district shall be flood-proofed in accordance
with the building code or elevated to above the regulatory flood protection elevation.
Telephone, electric, and/or gas service lines are to be placed underground in
accordance with the provisions of all applicable City ordinances.
Parking
Facilities:
(cont.)
Plans for the golf course redevelopment must show how off-street parking
requirements for a golf course are being met.
Plans for the residential portion of the development must demonstrate that required
off-street parking spaces can be provided for each of the proposed units.
Required
Signage:
New street signs will be required at all intersections at the developer’s expense.
Entrance
Monument:
Designs and locations for entrance monuments should be identified as part of any
future preliminary plan submittal. The applicant should consult with the City
Engineer as to whether such signs must be placed on outlots or if they can be
accommodated within easements.
Fire Hydrants: The applicant will be required to work with the Fire Chief, City Engineer, and Public
Works to identify the proper locations for future fire hydrants. Such work should be
completed prior to submittal of the future preliminary plat application.
Streetlights: Street lighting fixtures shall be installed in accordance with city standards
Monuments: In accordance with Section 153.13(F); reference monuments shall be placed in the
subdivision as required by state law.
Environmental & Other Neighborhood Impacts
Environmental
Impacts:
A voluntary EAW is currently being prepared by the applicant and is anticipated to
be ready for a 30-day public comment period in the upcoming weeks.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 23
Wetlands: The site contains approximately 15.99 acres of wetlands and 9.74 acres of required
wetland buffers.
The Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) is the Local Government Unit (LGU)
responsible for administering the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). The developer
will need to follow all of the rules and regulations spelled out in the WCA, and acquire
the needed permit from the VBWD.
Review and comment by the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) will be
needed with any future preliminary plat/plan application. The applicant is encouraged
to meet with the VBWD prior to any future submittal.
Shoreland
District:
Shorelands should be a major consideration in the development of this land as over
200 acres is included within multiple Shoreland overlays from various waterbodies on
and around this property.
The City’s current Shoreland Ordinance has not been approved by MnDNR as
required by State Statute, and a new draft ordinance is currently undergoing State
review. Due to this process, portions of the City slated for sewered development are
currently under a development Moratorium until the new Shoreland ordinance is in
place. While the Royal Golf Club land is not specifically subject to the moratoria, it
IS subject to Shoreland district requirements for PUDs which mandate access to
municipal sewer and water facilities. Staff requested that the DNR review the
proposed plans and provide direction on two things: 1) whether the plans conform to
minimum State rules, and 2) how the City must proceed with this application given
the pending ordinance updates. Because these new regulations could dramatically
impact how this land can be developed, the applicant is hereby put on notice that
preparing preliminary plans will be “at their own risk” if they choose to do so prior to
adoption of the new ordinance. Additionally, no preliminary approvals will be given
by the City until the new ordinance has been adopted, or until the DNR specifically
finds the proposed development is in conformance with minimum State requirements.
Importantly, the Shoreland overlay district PUD regulations specifically require such
developments to be connected to the municipal sewer and water systems.
Open space requirements largely mimic the City’s standard requirements for PUDs
outlined on page 10 of this report. Staff will continue to coordinate review of this
development with DNR staff to ensure all requirements are upheld.
The applicant shall work with the City Engineer to ensure that Shoreland specific
Stormwater management requirements are met with future plans.
UPDATE: DNR comments have been received and are attached to this report for review
by Council. The following is a summary of their feedback:
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 24
(cont.)
The underground portion of the unnamed public watercourse that flows through the
golf course will not be considered Shoreland.
Unnamed public water wetland 82041800 will not be part of the future Shoreland
district ordinance, so it will not being considered as protected Shoreland for review of
potential development scenarios on this property.
The DNR is requesting more information from the developer before it can adequately
evaluate the proposed PUD. Specifically, a site density evaluation will need to be
completed to show how proposed density relates to tiers around each protected water
body.
The concept PUD plan appears to meet or closely meet the 50 percent open space
requirement, but a more detailed analysis of the open space calculations is needed to
complete the Shoreland residential PUD analysis.
The bluff areas and wetlands within the shoreland districts for the public waters will
need to be mapped. These areas must be located so that they are not included in the
calculation for the area suitable for development in each tier. Also the bluff setback
standard should be taken into account when planning the location of structures near
bluffs.
Additional design planning is required to develop a stormwater management plan. As
part of the PUD analysis, the size and location of stormwater ponds will be required.
The DNR has provided a map that shows the location of the 100-year floodplain.
Because proposed lots are located in the 100-year floodplain, development in such
areas will need to follow state and local floodplain regulations.
Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) regulations must be followed for the WCA-
delineated wetland basins on the site.
Additional comments will be provided by MNDNR on the EAW for this proposed
project.
Erosion
Control:
The future grading plan should indicate proposed erosion control methodologies to be
utilized during the development process.
The applicant is advised to consult with the City Engineer to ensure that future plan
sets are to an appropriate scale which allows adequate review of proposed plans.
Silt fencing should be shown at the construction limits for the proposed houses or
driveways with the future building permit application.
Traffic: The EAW currently underway will include a traffic study to determine the potential
traffic impacts of this development.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 25
Transportation improvements needed to mitigate impacts may be identified as a result
of the EAW.
Flood Plain &
Steep Slopes:
(cont.)
According to the February 3, 2010 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps, there are areas
of floodplain on this property (mostly Zone A).
Of biggest concern is floodplain identified in the NE corner of the property which
seems to coincide with one of the proposed areas for residential development. The
applicant must delineate all FEMA floodplains on future plan sets and demonstrate
how such areas will be addressed by the future development.
All areas of steep slopes should be identified with any future submittal.
Docks: The project does not proposed any docks or deeded access to Rose or Horseshoe Lake.
Noise: Washington County Comments:
Washington County's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility
between land use and highways. Residential uses located adjacent to highways often
result in complaints about traffic noise. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed
noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of
Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities are responsible
for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA's
Noise Area Classification (NAC) where the establishment of the land use would result
in violations of established noise standards. Minnesota Statute 116.07, Subpart 2a
exempts County Roads and County State Aid Highways from noise thresholds.
County policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the
expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures in such areas. The
developer should assess the noise situation and take any action outside of County right
of way deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise.
Other Permits: All necessary permits must be provided to the City (VBWD, MPCA, NPDES, MDH,
etc).
Charges, Fees, and Responsibilities
In General: As always, the applicant is responsible for all fees related to the review of this
application (including but not limited to planning, legal, engineering, wetland,
environmental consultants, or other such experts as required by this application).
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 26
Park
Dedication:
(cont.)
Applicant Comments on Parks: While the golf course is public, no public parks are
proposed within the development. Use of the exercise facility, pool and youth course
will be included in the HOA dues. There have been discussions about the existing ball
field lighting being used in other parts of city; the exact nature of this is still under
discussion. We expect a park dedication fee will likely be paid.
Included in the development plan are 74.27 acres of private open space which is used
for environmental preservation, water quality protection, storm water management and
buffers from adjacent uses.
Section 153.14 of City Code requires all subdivisions of land to dedicate a
reasonable portion of land to the City for public use as parks, trails, or open space.
The percentage for an LDR development would be 10%.
205.66 residential acres * 10% = 20.6 acres
The concept plan is currently not proposing dedication of any land for public parks.
The Parks Commission was to review this area in August, but did not have a quorum.
Therefore no formal recommendation was made. Informal discussions were about
addressing the trail needs identified in the comprehensive trail plan. This item will be
discussed again at the September meeting.
Should this development move forward, the City will determine the fair market value
of the land by hiring a licensed appraiser (at the developer’s expense) prior to final
plat approval. The required cash-in-lieu of land payment shall be the fair market value
of the acreage not provided in land or trail easement dedication less the cost of trail
construction and other improvements.
Sewer Charges: Sanitary sewer service charges will consist of a $3,000 Sewer Availability Charge
(SAC) per REC unit plus $1,000 Sewer Connection Charge per REC unit. A Met
Council REC determination must be completed to verify the number of REC units
for the project.
Water Charges: Water service charges will consist of a $3,000 Water Availability Charge (WAC) per
REC unit plus $1,000 Water Connection Charge per REC unit. The number of REC
units will be as determined for SAC charges
Initial Feedback
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 27
Planning
Commission:
(cont.)
The Planning Commission was given an opportunity to orient themselves with the
proposal on 8/8/16, and conducted a subsequent public hearing on 8/22/16.
Summary of feedback from that meeting was as follows:
DEVELOPER COMMENTS:
1. City initially examined option to add the land to the Lake Elmo Regional
Park, but found that 95% of the land must be used for non-active recreation
so a golf course would not be allowed.
2. Golf course remodel will include 18 professionally designed holes and an
updated clubhouse. Housing needed to make the overall development
economically sustainable; the success of the clubhouse will be linked to the
success of the development.
3. Guiding conditions are to create a high quality, high amenity neighborhood
with recreational facilities providing a strong sense of identity; and respect
for existing site conditions. PUD needed to shift density away from
Shoreland district areas.
4. Five (5) different price points/lot sizes; two (2) different lifestyle choices
(villas and single family homes). Specialized design standards will ensure
high quality construction.
5. Proposed private streets will be eliminated in favor of public streets.
6. Transportation study and EAW nearly complete.
7. Golf course would be turned from a private course into a public course, and
will include a swimming pool & fitness center. Sustainability will be a
major component of the golf course design. Opening in 2017 is the target.
8. Trails and parkland dedication are open for discussion, but they would like
to approach it via cash in lieu of land. Private parks may be provided for
the proposed homes.
9. Phasing will be from west to northwest to east.
10. Access to 10th Street is being designed, and the intent would be to include
that with any future submittal.
11. Plans will continue to preserve/create vegetative buffers and/or distance
buffers from surrounding neighborhoods.
12. SAC/WAC fees will result in over $2.5M to the City, and building permit
fees anticipated to generate in excess of $1.5M in fees.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 28
(cont.)
13. Two entry points for the golf course are being worked out with City staff,
and will be addressed in a future submittal.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (summarized):
1. Make them follow the comprehensive plan and only allow them to develop
as an OP development (or at a rural standard similar to surrounding
neighborhoods) if they wish to build homes. Sewer and the proposed small
lot sizes are not appropriate north of 10th Street.
2. Protect existing homes in The Homestead and Tartan Meadows by
preserving golf course frontage (or open park space) for homes that have
enjoyed such views over the years. Buffers for all surrounding lands was
raised by multiple speakers.
3. Redesign of the golf course should be on the periphery of the property with
the new homes central to the property. On-going investments in the golf
course are at the developer’s own risk, and should not be taken into
consideration when deciding what type of development (if any) is
appropriate on this land.
4. If an exception is made to the plan, then the City does not have a plan.
Rural character of this property should be preserved.
5. EAW needs to be completed before anything moves forward, and the
resulting development should be designed around environmental
protection. Concern was expressed that the existing plan will take out
significant areas of trees, and that traffic impacts will be too much for
surrounding roads to handle, and/or will create significant safety concerns
for vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists.
6. City is not obligated to make any changes to the Comprehensive Plan. City
should not rush into any decision.
7. Loss of wildlife habitat is a concern.
8. Small setbacks raise concerns about fire safety if proper siding materials
are not used.
9. A trail on the south side of 20th Street is needed for safety.
COMMISSION FINDINGS:
Following discussion and input from each of the Planning Commissioners, the
following findings were voted on and approved by the Commission:
1. Density at 2.2 D.U.A., if such were to move forward, would require
municipal sewer.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 29
(cont.)
2. Any form of residential development will require a comprehensive plan
amendment.
3. The property could be developed under the City’s OP or RE development
standards.
4. The City has no need to guide for more sewered residential development
based on the Comprehensive Plan and the Metropolitan Councils
population forecast for 2040.
5. The proposed concept plan has multiple unresolved issues including
buffers, access points, cul-de-sac lengths, and connectivity; each would
need to be addressed in any future plan regardless of the density.
6. Changing zoning to allow development like that which is proposed by the
Concept PUD will increase the City’s tax base and lessen the tax burden on
the rest of Lake Elmo.
7. Existing residential development north of 10th Street, South of 30th St and
east of Lake Elmo Ave is not expected to need sewer connection to address
failing septic systems until at least 2040.
8. The total number of homes in the current proposal exceeds by 30% the total
number of homes that could potentially be created using OP development
standards.
9. The golf course is a significant asset to the City of Lake Elmo.
Other General
Staff Concerns:
Detailed work on the public/private portions of this development will still need to be
worked out (i.e. stormwater ponds are required to be on public land, but areas within
the golf course are proposed to handle the residential stormwater. Are the
applicant’s comfortable having the golf course potentially cut up into Outlots and
subject to easements for stormwater purposes?)
Will trails from the residential neighborhood to the golf course be public? What
about other neighborhood facilities such as a pool, internal trails, fitness center, and
kids golf course? How will access to the golf course land be managed?
The long southern cul-de-sac should extend to the neighboring property whether the
road continues to 10th Street or not.
Conclusion
The City Council is asked to examine the proposed PUD Concept Plan and provide
guidance to the applicant on if and how to proceed. Keep in mind that a conditional
approval at this point simply allows the applicant to proceed to the preliminary plan
stage, and does NOT carry with it any assurances of future success or approvals. Denial
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 30
of the concept plan at this point WILL require the applicant to reassess the approach and
return with a revised/new concept plan before proceeding to a preliminary plan.
Council
Options:
(cont.)
The City Council has the following options:
A) APPROVAL of the requested Concept Plan based on the applicant's submission,
the contents of this report, public testimony and other evidence available to the
Council.
B) DENIAL of the requested Concept Plan based on the applicant's submission, the
contents of this report, public testimony and other evidence available to the
Council.
C) TABLE the request for further study.
Review
Roadmap:
Per code, the concept plan is simply an opportunity for the applicant to submit a plan
showing the basic intent and general nature of the entire development, and there are no
specific criteria to guide approval or denial of a concept plan. Staff would recommend
using the following as a guide for discussion.
(1) Is taking action on a comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning
warranted at this time given changes that have occurred since the current
plan and zoning map were last adopted?
a. If no, Council should deny this application and review of the plan details
would become unnecessary.
b. If YES, provide direction to staff on which comp plan/rezoning methodology
is preferred moving forward:
i. New comp plan designation and new corresponding zoning district (could
take upwards of 3 to 5 months to complete);
ii. Guiding land for Urban Low Density Development (easy solution, but
requires the applicant to return with a plan showing 3.5+ units per acre
within the residential areas); or
iii. Create the potential for guidance of the property to Village Urban Low
Density if certain criteria are met; or
iv. Another option not listed in this report (i.e. utilization of Rural Single
Family and RS zoning).
Once a direction is recommended, proceed to the next review point.
PUD Concept Plan Review: Royal Golf Club
City Council Report; 9-6-16
Page 31
(cont.)
(2) Have the applicant’s demonstrated the proposal fulfills at least one of the
identified objectives in Section 154.751 to permit development as a PUD?
a. If NO, deny the concept plan and provide findings to support the denial.
Further review of the plan details would become unnecessary, so no further
action on this application would be needed.
b. If YES, proceed to the next review point.
(3) What changes would need to be included with any future preliminary
submittal before it could be accepted for approval?
Approval to proceed should be conditioned upon the applicant addressing the
issues documented within the staff report, and other items as listed by the City
Council.
Staff Guidance: The City’s discretion on the comprehensive plan guidance for this property and the
corresponding zoning is very broad, so we recommend basing a decision on whether
the proposal is best for this property, best for the surrounding properties, and best for
the City as a whole. If the Council believes a comprehensive plan change IS
warranted at this time and would like to accommodate the current application, we
are recommending utilizing the third option presented in the staff report: create the
potential to use the Village Urban Low Density classification if certain criteria are
met.
Regarding needed changes to the development if the proposal moves forward, staff
has provided an extensive list of things to address within this report. Accordingly,
we would recommend including the following as part of any motion:
“Adherence to the staff recommendations listed within the staff report as may have
been amended here tonight.”
Likewise, we would recommend conditioning any approval of the concept plan on
the applicant’s successfully gaining approval of the needed comprehensive plan
amendment and rezoning prior to approval of any future preliminary PUD
application. At the applicant’s own risk, such applications may run concurrently
with offset review dates before the City Council.