Attachment F

1 Attachment F

This copyright handbook is being published by the Charrette Steering Committee for use at the charrette. The purpose of the handbook is to provide information concerning the charrette and the location to charrette participants.

Steering Committee Members: Katie Bassett,Shady Lane Neighbor Paul Penningroth, Old Holdridge Neighbor Ann Markus, Bushaway Neighbor Thomas Tanner, Wayzata City Council Bryan Gadow, AICP, Wayzata City Planner Dallas Johnson, Yacht Club Commodore Bert Foster, Yacht Club Board of Directors Member Dr. Ross Siemers, President Wayzata Sailing Foundation Howard Nordeen, Wayzata Sailing Foundation, Board Member

Among other sources information for this handbook was provided by: Bryan Gadow, City of Wayzata Michael Kelly, City of Wayzata The Wayzata Historical Society The Minnesota Historical Society Greg Nybeck, The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District James Wisker, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Nicholas Peterson, Hennepin County Gordon Gunlock Bert Foster, Wayzata Yacht Club Dallas Johnson, Wayzata Yacht Club Mark Jana, Wayzata Yacht Club Allen Klugman, PE. Westwood Professional Services Frank Sabota, Sabota Enviromental Services 44 interviews of City Council, Planning Commission, Yacht Club, Sailing Center and Neighbors Parking Attendants Wayzata Trolley Steve Bern, Yacht Club Manager Cappy Holland Executive Director Wayzata Sailing Foundation

Planning Consultant Midwest Planning & Design, LLC

2 Attachment F

Briefing Hand Book Table of Contents Using this Briefing Handbook 4 Chapter One Charrette Folder Charrette ,Mission Goals ,and Detailed Expected Product Schedule: Purpose 5 Draft Mission Statement 5 Mission Process 5 Mission Goals 6 Charrette Product Expectations 7 Detail Schedule with responsibilities and times 9 Charrette Details: 12 Location Organization: Facilitator’s Role Workstation Assignments and Tasks Physical Organization and Materials Workstations Sieve Overlays Briefing Binder Food Service Presentations and Large Group Interactions Technical Experts and Facilitator Draft Vision Statement 14 Charrette Room Layout diagram 15 Chapter Two Local Context Folders Wayzata Folder 16 Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Entitlements Existing Land Use Map Zoning District Map Relevant Zoning Regulations Yacht Club and Sailing Center Conditional Use Permits 22 Public Streets and Public Lake Access Utility Information Summary of Site and Natural Resource information Historical Resource Information Neighborhood Folder 37 View Analysis Neighborhood Architecture Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Folder 44 Relevant Rules Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Folder 44 Multiple Dock Permits for the Yacht Club and Sailing Center Boat Density Dock Plan Wayzata Yacht Club Folder 49 Mission and Vision Description Organization and Membership Policies Typical Race Schedule Parking Study 54 Wayzata Community Sailing Center Folder 59 Vision Description and Programs New Facilities Interviews and Analysis Folder 63 Summary and detail discussion Issues Analysis and planning strategies Sources and notes 77

3 Attachment F

Chapter Three Planning Area Folder Site Analysis Folder The maps will be available in large scale at the charrette Base Map Physical Data by Parcel Aerial Photograph County Proposed Eastman Lane Plan Wetlands Map Air Photo Right-of-Way Diagram

Chapter Four White Papers Folder CD Folder only Sailing History Adaptive Sailing Sailing Schools Discussion and Context Sensitive Design Eastman Lane Lake Minnetonka Dredging Policy Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Summary of Dock and Boat Storage Rules Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Cooperative Agreement For a Public Boat Ramp City of Wayzata and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Green Parking Green Parking Lots, Planning by Design: Montgomery County Planning Commission Bioretention Applications Environmental Protection Agency Field Evaluation of Permeable Pavements for Stormwater Management Environmental Protection Agency Green Parking Rehbein Environmental Solutions Cultural Resource Study

Chapter Five Context Photo Folder CD Folder only Yacht Club Club house, land east of the club house and docks West parking lot, public boat launch and docks East Parking Lot

Sailing Center Arlington Circle South (Fire lane) Eastman Lane

Using this Briefing Hand Book: The purpose of this book is to provide information to be helpful to the charrette participants known as “stakeholders”. The book consists of organizational information to provide each stakeholder the opportunity to fully participate in the charrette. The book will help the stakeholder navigate the charrette process by understand their role in the charrette, the charrette’s organization including a detail schedule, expectations, how decisions are made, and the resources that will be available at the charrette to assist the stakeholder in collectively formulating a master plan and implementation tools.

Because successful participation depends on coming to the charrette as an active, knowledgeable par- ticipant, we developed background information organized into context folders. The context folders include the planning area (Arlington Circle South , Burlington Northern Santa Fe Rail Road ,Eastman Lane, Central Ave. south of Eastman Lane and the property owned by the yacht club and the sailing foundation within the regional, city, and neighbor context. Also, the context folders provide all the background information necessary to formulated a master plan including: natural and cultural resource information, neighborhood information, traffic and street information, zoning, entitlement, Watershed District, and Lake Minnetonka Conservation District information, historical information, detail organizational operational and site information related to the yacht club and sailing center, and a series of maps with detail information . By studying the background information contained in this book, each stakeholder will have the knowledge and resources similar to any of the experts involved in the process.

4 Attachment F

Chapter One; Charrette Mission Statement, Mission Goals, Detailed Expected Product and Organization

Mission Statement: Purpose: This organizational statement describes the overreaching purpose of the charrette. It represents the higher-level purpose that each of us, as stakeholders, agree to strive to achieve during the charrette. The Mission Statement will be used as a guide throughout the charrette to describe the project to new comers and to the press, and to keep the planning effort on task. The statement is divided into three parts; The mission statement, drafted by the Steering Committee, is presented for approval by the charrette participants at the beginning of the charrette. The mission process describes the means that each of us as participants agree to use to create a concept master plan and implementation tools. The mission goals illustrate the goals that each of us agree to try to accomplish during the charrette planning process.

Draft Mission Statement:The Charrette’s Mission is to bring together community and neighborhood leaders; the leaders of the Wayzata Yacht Club and Wayzata Community Sailing Center along with key City, Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District staff and technical experts to create a master plan and implementation tools for the Yacht Club and Sailing Center that:  Resolves existing issues;  Protects and enhances the Lake, the Neighborhood, the Yacht Club and the Sailing Center as community assets;  Creates a balance of neighborhood and community needs with those of the Yacht Club and Sailing Center so that all exist in harmony.

Charrette Mission Process: The Steering Committee has chosen to use the Charrette planning process to create the master plan and implementation tools because it will bring talented, creative leaders and professionals into the process, encourage the free flow of ideas, and stimulate a creative/synergistic planning event. The charrette process is organdie around the following elements:

 Imaging and Sharing Information: The Charrette imaging format involves participants arranging drawings of various plan elements on a map to develop a master plan and then creating the tools to accomplish the master plan over time.

 Professional Facilitator and Workstations: Each of five work stations will continuously collaborate. A floating professional facilitator, moves among workstations (groups of people working on a plan) making suggestions, encouraging “thinking out of the box,” helping with direction, and encouraging the sharing of collective ideas among workstations as the charrette proceeds;  Workstations are organized around the charrette’s mission and product wih a seat

5 Attachment F

at the table for each stakeholder. Neighbors and others who were not identified as stakeholders, but who wish to attend the charrette can join in the process.

Technical Assistance: Besides Stakeholders and others that may wish to join in the charrette planning process, Technical assistance such as a traffic and parking specialist, civil engineers, landscape architects and architects will be available to work with the stakeholders to create a plan.

Charrette Mission Goals (part of the mission Statement): Participation Goals: Stakeholders invited: The Charrette Steering Committee, which consists of city, neighborhood, yacht club and sailing center leaders, invited you as key leader (stakeholder) from the neighborhood, community, yacht club, sailing center, or agencies that can contribute to the quality of the plan and its successful adoption. They also invited a professional facilitator and design professionals who can provide skills in design, ecology, water use, and engineering.

Participatory ground rules: As a participating stakeholder we all agree to:  Strive to understand before trying to be understood, and to promote full and active participation;  Use consensus as the decision making tool;  Strive to respect the opinion of others;  Strive to be open and to embrace and support the decisions arrived at by consensus;  Clearly articulating any objections to the decisions at the charrette so that they can be resolved rather than being silent only to voice the objection in another form;  Strive to obtain commitment to support the charrette’s plan as it is legitimized.  Support the consensus plan and implementation tool developed at the charrette.

Product Goals: to produce a high-quality master plan, including site plan design with illustrations, entitlement document, and broad operating principles: Design goals:  Create a plan to enhance the community assets identified as the neighborhood, yacht Club and sailing center;  The planning area includes: the Lake on which boats are moored or docked, the land owned by the Wayzata Yacht Club and the Wayzata Sailing Foundation, Eastman Lane and Arlington Circle, Central Ave south of Eastman Lane (public boat launch), and the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way;  Consider sustainable design practices including energy and best management practices (BMP) for storm water retention and runoff.  Use the charrette process and the master plan to resolve a number of existing issues.

6 Attachment F

Broad Operating Principles Goal: Develop broad operating principle for such things as use of the yacht club’s club house and the sailing center, regattas, use of the grounds, neighborhood use of the facilities, and other items that will help to resolve existing issues.

Legitimization, Entitlement and Amendment Goals:  Create a method of legitimizing the decisions and plan agreed upon during the charrette so the City Council, LMDC, Watershed District (MCWD) can approve entitlements that are: legal, fair to all concerned, predictable, and provide for sus- tained operations of the yacht Club and sailing center in harmony with the neighborhood and community.  Create an amendment method to amend the plan from time to time involving stakeholders from all those represented at the charrette.

Public/Private partnership Goals:  Work in partnership with the City, LMDC, MCWD, DNR, yacht club, sailing center and neighborhood to develop the plan and to implement the plan;  Commit to continue the partnership after the plan is completed.

Charrette Product Expectations: Expectations: This is an organizational statement articulating what the stakeholders expect to accomplish in terms of product at the charrette. It consists of a list of products that will be included in the master plan.

The following products are expected be produced as part of the charrette process: This pre-charrette Briefing Hand Book containing:  Charrette participation information and charts to help the participants to understand the charrette process arrangement, and schedule;  Contextual paper containing information and maps such as historical information, information about the neighborhood, sailing center and yacht club, Lake environmental and ecological information, land use, entitlement information, traffic, road, railroad and parking information, detailed information about the site, and a view analysis. This information will be used to facilitate understanding of the variety of local context of the yacht club and sailing centers relative to:  the Old Holdridge, Shady Lane, and Bushaway Neighborhoods, an eclectic neighborhood of single family cottages, larger homes and multifamily,  Wayzata, a lake community striving to retain its small town character,  Lake Minnetonka, and  Eastman Lane the east gateway to the community;  Interview information from the interviews conducted last summer  Draft charrette mission statement and draft master plan vision statement to be approved at the charrette by the stakeholders;  Comparison and Technical papers: These are resource papers prepared by the consultants and from official city and other agency documents that will address the issues discovered in the interviews conducted last summer. The papers will provide in-

7 Attachment F

formation about the club and sailing center, history of sailing on the Lake, cultural resource information about the planning area , public lake access information, street and parking information.

Shared vision: Within the context, the information and the City’s guide plan, the charrette participants will be asked to approve a vision statement for this area. Visioning is a facilitated interactive process that creates ownership in the plan, commitment to its implementation and a statement depicting what the Stakeholders are striving to create in words and images.

The Charrette will result in a plan with illustration including the following elements: Site Concept Master Plan including:  Location of all buildings on WYC and WCSC lots including both existing and proposed structures with lot dimensions, dimensions of proposed and existing structures, and existing and proposed setbacks of all buildings located on property;  Location and number of existing and proposed parking spaces, storage areas, slips and ramps;  Concept best management practices (BMP) to improve water quality;  Vehicular access and circulation including: parking, curb cuts, driveways and drop offs;  Pedestrian circulation system;  Public access plan  Location and type of existing and proposed lighting;  Site plan details such as trash receptacles, dock, ramp, slide, and slip locations;  Lot dimensions and area;  Dimensions of proposed and existing structures;  Concept landscape and aesthetics plan;  Architectural elevations (type and materials used in external surfaces);  General cost and financing estimate, and 20 year implementation program.

Entitlements and Amendment:  The charrette will develop an entitlement method for zoning based on the master plan .  The Charrette will develop an amendment process agreement by which the master plan and the entitlements can be amended.

Broad Operating Principles: The charrette will develop broad-operating principles to resolve existing issues, without curtailing the operation of the club or sailing center.

8 Attachment F

D etailed WYC/ WCSCCharrette Schedule Master Plan Date Activity and Task During Objective Approximate Location & Responsibility the Activity Start time Comments End time May, 2010 Briefing Hand Send Briefing Opportunity to Computer Disk Book Hand Book to become familiar containing the (Richard Krier) each stake- with the loca- Hand Book holder tional context and the site, schedule and details. Friday Reconnaissance Sign in Work- Understanding 1:00PM Bay Center June 18` walking tour of station assign- location context 2:30PM gathering the yacht club, ments; Wel- with context sailing school come by Dallas survey and and neighbor- Johnson and camera; Partici- hoods City Council pants when (Richard Krier) Member; signing in will Pre-tour brief- be given col- ing by Richard ored nametags Krier that will desig- nate their workstation;

Friday Walking Tour Charrette par- Document and 2:30 PM Bay Center June 18 Debriefing ticipants to prioritize key 3:30 PM (Facilitator) share observa- observations tions

Friday Charrette Mission State- Understanding 3:30PM Bay Center June 18 Facilitator ment, Goals and Mission and 5:00 PM Process; Process; Ap- Master Plan prove a Charrette Vision State- Mission State- ment ment and a Mas- ter Plan Vision Statement

Friday Dr. Ross Buffet Dinner; Social & 5:00 PM Bay Center June 18 Siemers, Welcome by Educational 6:30 PM Sailing Founda- TBA; tion ,President Introductions; Master of Cere- Product Expec- monies tations; Work- station, process Facilitator and responsibility Friday Charrette Small Group Creative syner- 6:30 PM Bay Center June 18 Facilitator workstations gistic process: 9:00 PM Select reporter; Create concepts

Way zataY achtClub The followin g is an ou tlin e of he t charrette sched u le including r esponsib ilities, activ ities an d timing: Charrette Process Schedule:

9 Attachment F

Date Activity and Task During the Objective Approximate Location & Responsibility Activity Start time Comments End time

Saturday Charrette Reports by each Sharing ideas de- 8:00 AM Bay Center June 19 Facilitator work station veloped on Fri- 9:30 AM Buffet Breakfast day, discussing at the work sta- impasses and is- tions sues Saturday Charrette Small Group Creative synergis- 9:30 AM Bay Center June 19 Facilitator work stations tic process: 12:00 PM Develop plan segments and illustrations Saturday Charrette Reports by each Synthesis: Each 12:00 PM Bay Center June 19 Facilitator work station workstation pre- 1:30 PM Buffet Lunch at Lunch sents plan seg- the work stations ments and illustrations for discussion Saturday Charrette Small Group Finalize plan seg- 1:30 PM Bay Center June 19 Facilitator work stations ments based on 3:00 PM 3:30 PM Re- discussion freshments Prepare final illustrations

Saturday Charrette Group meeting Each workstation 3:00 PM Bay Center June 19 Facilitator all work stations presents final plan 4:30 PM segments & illustrations

Saturday Charrette Synergize plans, Final Plan and 4:30 PM Bay Center June 19 Facilitator Evaluation Implementation 5:00 PM Wrap up and Tools Thanks

10 Attachment F

Charrette Detail Our process objective is to create a synergistic environment conducive to creativity, which will enable the participants to produce outstanding designs for the Planning Area, including a concept master plan, broad operating principles, a means of entitlement and an agreement of how the plan can be amended (implementation tools).

Charrette Location: Bay Center Development Office South East Entrance Facing Lake Street. Charrette Organization: Basic Plan We use the continuously collaborative “fish bowl” charrette method, that utilizes a floating professional facilitator who moves among the work stations making suggestions, encouraging “thinking out of the box”, helping with direction, and encouraging the sharing of collective ideas among workstations. As the charrette proceeds, this method is key to the charrette process.

The charrette is organized into one implementation workstation and four design workstations. The four design workstations consist of professional designers (Landscape Architects, Architects, Civil Engineers, Hydrologist and Parking Specialist ) and stakeholders that work together. They will be responsible for producing a master plan as described earlier in the product expectations. These design workstation objectives and groups consist of: Design Workstation One Objective is an overall plan with an emphasis on the Sailing Center and Arlington Circle South (Fire Lane) Stakeholders at this workstation: Marty Bassett or Katie Bassett Dr. Ross Siemers Howard Noreen Thomas Tanner Toni Peet Lynn Gruber Ellen Dehaven Landscape Architect Meg Amosti and Architect John Crump

Design Workstation Two Objective is an overall plan with an emphasis on East- man Lane. Stakeholders at this workstation: Michael Kelly Chris Fittipaldi Jonathan McDonagh Ann Markus Gordy Straka Merrily Borg Babcock Landscape Architect Chris Oaks, Civil Engineer Peter Willenbring, Traffic Engineer Allen Klugman

11 Attachment F

Design Workstation Three Objective is overall plan with an emphasis on 2 or more scenarios for the east yacht club property. Stakeholders at this workstation: Greg Schultz Dale Roberts Dallas Johnson Mark Janda Janet Sabes or Robert Sabes Kristen Eide-Tollefson Architect Randy Gould, Landscape Architect Bill Sanders, Traffic Engi- neer Allen Klugman

Design Workstation Four Objective is overall plan with emphasis on the public boat launch, yacht club’s club house property, and yacht club’s west parking lot. Stakeholders at this workstation: Paul Penningroth Roger Patterson Bert Foster Larry Aubuchon James Wisker Richard Glidwell Dan Baasen Landscape Architect Mark Apfbacher, Traffic Engineer Allen Klugman

Implementation Workstation Five Operating, Entitlement and Future Proc- ess Workstation: Besides being involved in overall plan, the primary function of this workstation is to develop the following:  Develop broad operating principles;  Legitimize the plan developed at the other workstations in the form of a comprehensive plan amendment and a zoning ordinance amendment.  Develop a recommendation to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Rules for plan implementation.  Develop a recommendation to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District for the plan implementation.  Develop a process for amending the plan and zoning regulations Stakeholders at this workstation consist the following: Dennis Morrison Doug Sauter Steven Bren Bryan Gadow Richard Krier Karl Ludescher Greg Nybeck We ask that each workstation select a spokesperson to report at each of the

12 Attachment F

group gatherings (see detail schedule for group gatherings) .

Physical Organization and Materials: The following is a description of the charrette room (see diagram included ) arrang ment and the materials supplied to the participants: Workstations: Workstations One through Four consist of a table with chairs, a flip chart and tran parent sieve map easel. The base map and sieve layer will be on clear plastic and fixed to the easel. Each table will have Sharpies and pencils, a scale, note pads, 24 by 36 air photo and tracing paper.

Sieve: We are using an overlay sieve method that allows the stakeholders to overlay information including a base map with 2-foot contour interval topography and existing features, natural features map with regulated and unregulated features, and a view analysis map. Participants can design on the easel screen by using the 36 inch or 12 inch tracing paper. The natural features layer consists of:

Regulated natural areas protected by law including: Protected wetlands; Flood Plain; Lake Minnetonka below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Non-regulated natural areas such as trees or tree massing and soils.

Briefing Hand Book: This briefing hand book will be available at each work station. We will mail these books in CD disk format to each stakeholder and technical person before the charrette.

Food: A buffet service will be set up in the work area. Participants are invited to help themselves and to eat at their workstations. We will serve: Buffet Dinner Friday Continental Breakfasts Saturday Refreshments.

Presentations and large group interactions will take place in the work area Friday June 18 Welcome: Dallas Johnson, Commodore Pre-tour briefing by Richard Krier Tour debriefing facilitated by Trudy Richter Charrette Mission Statement, Process and Goals facilitated by Trudy Richter Master Plan Vision Statement facilitated by Trudy Richter

Friday June 18 Dinner Master of Ceremonies Dr. Ross Siemers Welcome by Wayzata Official TBA Introductions by Dr. Ross Siemers Charrette organization, expectations facilitated by Trudy Richter

13 Attachment F

Saturday June 19 Sharing ideas, discussing issues and impasses facilitated by Trudy Richert Saturday June 19 Synthesis; plan segment presentation for discussion facilitated by Trudy Richter Saturday June 19 Final plan and illustrations presentations facilitated by Trudy Richter

Technical Experts: The technical expert that have been invited to participate in the charrette are:  Facilitator Trudy Richter, Richardson, Richter & Associates, Inc.  Landscape Architect Meg Amosti, RLA : Specializes in environmental and urban design, and site planning; Windsor Company, St. Paul;  Landscape Architect Chris Oaks, ASLA, USGBC: Specializes in urban and park design and site planning; Windsor Company, St. Paul;  Landscape Architect Bill Sanders, ASLA: Specializes in urban design and recreational facilities; principle at Sanders Wacker and Bergly, St. Paul;  Landscape Architect Craig Wilson, ASLA: Specializes in low impact development  Civil Engineer Peter Willenbring, P.E.:Specializes in municipal engineering, principle at WSB, Plymouth;  Traffic Engineer Allen Klugman, P.E.: Specializes in traffic engineering and parking lot design; principle at Westwood Professional Services, Inc, Eden Prairie  Design Architect Randy Gould, Specializes in architectural management and design, Ryan Companies Minneapolis  Architect John Crump, AIA, LEED: Specializes in Institutional Architecture  Planner Richard Krier, AICP, Specializes in urban design and master plans, principle Midwest Planning & Design, LLC

Draft Vision Statement : A vision statement is a simple positive statement of the stakeholder’s articulation of what they envision the yacht Club and sailing school to be. It embodies the basis for the foundation of the master plan and provides direction to the stakeholders as to what the master plan should achieve. The Steering Committee formulated the following positive draft vision statement for the stakeholders’ consideration:

We envision the yacht club and sailing center, as an important part of the community's character that adds to the quality of life, can aesthetically fit into the community fabric and the image of the small town on the Lake. Our vision is a first rate primarily competitive sailing yacht club and educational sailing center, welco ing all members of the community to experience the sport of sail ing, located on an important gateway to the community, compatible with the neighborhood and the neighborhood’s arch- tecture.

14 Attachment F

The above diagram is a schematic of the where the charrette will take place. Each of the workstations ( 1-5) are labeled as well as the food service area and conference area, where different workstation can conference without disturbing the other stations.

15 Attachment F

Chapter Two Local Context Folders Creating a successful master plan, requires an understanding of the local setting . This means not only understanding the real sitting, but also understanding WYC and WCSC context perceived by the sailors, community and the neighborhood. This context may be documented by physical evidence, expanded by local possibilities, and constrained by the setting and local situation. This section deals with the information obtained from the records search and the interviews relative to:  The perception that neighbors and public officials have of WYC and WCSC and an analysis based on interviews;  The neighborhood context interpolated from official documents and interviews;  The WYC and WCSC history and entitlements, and  Information about the site and neighborhood from various sources.

Wayzata Folder: Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Entitlements: A number of official documents help understand the neighborhoods, yacht club and sailing center. The City’s Comprehensive Plan and its implementation tool, the zoning ordinance, represents officially articulated and legal identity of the neighborhoods including the yacht club and sailing center. The zoning ordinance, as a comprehensive plan implementation tool, must conform to the plan for it to have a legal basis in the control of private property. Relevant parts of comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance are discussed along with the entitlements that are either inherent or have been granted by the City of Wayzata and exist on the property today.

Comprehensive Plan: This document represents the official policies of the City related to public improvements, transportation, private land use, and public facilities. The plan has been adopted by the City Council and approved by the Metropolitan Council.

The City’s board objectives contained in the Comprehensive Plan provide insight into the official thinking or what is important in the context of the community and neighborhood character. These objectives include: Preserve and enhance Wayzata’s “small town” character: Scale, walkability, land use patterns, Street and boulevard character Strong residential neighborhoods Reinforce and enhance residential neighborhoods A vibrant and healthy business climate A strong downtown is key to the economic and social base of the community Preserve and enhance the business structure for primary retail/commercial areas Family orientation Built physical environment to allow for the development of cultural and social activities that provide the opportunity for social engagement. Community heritage Built community form; redevelopment of significant properties; small town roots

16 Attachment F

Preservation of historic or significant properties Maintain and enhance the diversity of housing options Continue to recognize housing diversity is a community asset Address the need and opportunities for life cycle housing A connected community Build physical and psychological connections between all residential neighbor hoods, business areas, and links to other recreational amenities Protection of amenities Preserve and protect significant natural resource areas Promote access to community park and open space resources. Strengthen and reinforce community gateways (Eastman Lane is a community gateway) Provide announcement and a sense of place to areas of the community at key entry points through architectural, landscape and urban design elements Sustainability As addressed in: policy decisions, legislative actions, administrative actions, and project implementation””

The City’s Comprehensive Plan Land Use Section and Zoning Ordinance classifies these areas as follows: Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan Land Use Zoning Ordinance Designa- Relevant use allowed by Area Designations tion Conditional Use Permit

Old Holdridge Mix of single family and medium R-3A single and two family Not applicable Neighborhood density multifamily residential, R-2A single family residential Shady Lane Low density single family R-2A single family Not applicable Eastman/ Busha- Estate single family R-1 low density single family Not applicable way WCSC Semi Public/Private R-2A single family residen- Sailing School, tial WYC Semi Public/Private (club house East of Central Ave: R-1 low R 2A- Sailing School; property west and east parking lot) density residential; West of and Central Ave: R-2A Single R-1- Commercial outdoor Estate Single Family (small sliver Family Residential recreational areas including of land east of the club house prop- golf courses and country erty) clubs, Swimming pools and similar facilities

WYC uses are not allowed in the R-2A zoning district by CUP

Semi-Public/Private - Semi-public/private land uses include private golf courses, yacht clubs, sailing schools and other quasi public recreational facilities and uses.

17 Attachment F

The first map is the land use plan from the comprehensive plan. This map divides the city into various land use categories and takes prece- dent over the zoning map.

The second map is the zoning ordinance map that divides the city in to zoning districts. As it relates to the yacht club the maps are in conflict.

18 Attachment F

Relevant Existing Zoning Standards: Relevant standards that apply to WYC and WCSC property are as follows: Zoning District Bulk Requirements: The R2A single family zoning district (sailing center and the area west of Central Ave boat ramp) rules require: 1) a 25,000 square foot minimum lot area, 2) principle structures to have 20-foot rear yard setback, 50-foot front yard setback, 75-foot lake yard setback, and 15-foot side yard setback with the rear yard being reduced to 5 feet for accessory structures. Lot coverage is limited to 20% of the lot area and impervious surface is limited to 30% of the lot area (25% in the shore land overlay zoning district). Accessory structures have a height limit of 20 feet. Lake lots the front yard is the yard that faces the street; Lake lots do not have a rear yard. Also, an existing structures front yard setback (yard towards Eastman Lane) is the distance from the street right-of-way to the existing home (Principal structure).

The R-1 district (yacht club east of Central Ave.) rules require: 1) a 40,000 square foot lot area; 2) lot depth of 150 feet; 3) side yard setback of 20 feet, 4) front yard setback of 45 feet and 5) rear yard setback of 50 feet with accessory structures having a 10-foot side and rear yard. Structures adjacent to shoreline used exclusively for the storage of watercraft must have a side yard setback of 10 feet. Lot coverage is limited to 15% of the lot area, and impervious surface is limited to 25% of lot area.

Shore Land Overlay District (All the land in the planning area): This overlay-zoning district puts the following relevant additional condition on property within 1000 feet of Lake Minnetonka: Building Setback for the principle and non-water oriented accessory structures, and buildings: 75 feet from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of 929.4 feet above sea level and a variable setback, which is determined by the location of riparian structures located on either side. Of the options for deter- mining this setback the most restrictive would be 78 feet on the WCSC property. Any additions or new structures on the sailing center land would require a 78-foot lake setback. The 75-foot lake setback is measured from the OHWL, which wraps around the west WYC lot and sailing center lot from the lake along the shore of the dredge channel. 35-foot building height; 25% to 100% impervious surface coverage with anything over 25% subject to storm water treatment facilities with an approved conditional use permit and shore land impact plan; Water related accessory structures are allowed based on the allowed uses in the zoning district (WYC R-1 and R-2A and WSCS R-2A). These accessory uses cannot be more than 10 feet high or 250 square feet in area (400 SF and 20 feet wide for boat and related storage) and must be located at least 10 feet from the OHWL. The view from the lake must be camouflaged and the roof with a safety rail may be used as a deck. Also, stairways, lifts, handicapped ramps and landing areas with width restrictions are allowed adjacent to the lake.

19 Attachment F

Special provisions for semi public uses include: double setbacks or vegetative screening from the lake; vegetative or topographic screening of parking areas; limits on: signing, short term moorings, lighting, vegetation clearing, trimming and pruning, grading and filling, placement and design of parking lots, driveways and roads must have the same setbacks as structures, and there are provisions for storm water management.

Parking Requirements: Parking Stall Size: Except for compact car parking, 9 feet wide by 20 feet or 18 feet long when at 90 degrees (the most efficient way to park vehicles) a 24-foot wide two way driving isle is required. Twenty percent of the parking spaces can be designed for compact cars having an 8-foot wide and 16 feet long stall. Except for certain businesses which are allowed to provide restricted joint parking, parking must be on the same lot and under the same ownership as the principle use. Parking lot entrances must be at least 40 feet from intersections and all properties are entitled to at least one driveway access from an abutting and improved public street. Driveway accesses must be 125 feet apart. Parking Spaces Required Marinas ands Schools: Marinas are required to have seven spaces for each 10 boats or mooring spaces. Sailing Schools Although there are requirements for public and private schools there are not requirements for a sailing school. It appears that the City can set the standard based on: “Subject to the review and processing of a conditional use permit as regulated by Section 801.04 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City may reduce the number of required off-street parking spaces and/or loading spaces when the use can demonstrate in documented form a need which is less than required. In such situations, the City may require land to be reserved for parking development should use or needs change” .

Flood Plain Overlay Zoning District: A large part of the WCSC front yard (toward the street) is below the 100-year regional flood plain 931.5 feet) classified in the zoning ordinance as (AE) Floodway. Within the overlay flood zoning district the following relevant uses and standards apply: Allowed permanent land uses and conditional uses: Allowed uses provided no fill, excavation, structures, storage of materials or equipment and the use does not reduce the storage capacity of the floodway; boat launching ramps, trails, swimming areas, and for In- dustrial commercial and residential uses loading and parking areas; Conditional use as long as they do not reduce the flood storage capacity including: structures accessory to open spaces, placement of fill, marinas, boat rental, docks, piers, wharves and water control structures, streets, bridges, storage yards for readily removable equipment and ma- chinery or materials and similar uses. The fill must be limited to what is needed to grade or landscape for the conditional use. The lowest level of a building near the flood plain including the basement which is not

20 Attachment F

flood proofed, must be located at least one-foot above the regional flood elevation of 931.5 feet above sea level.

Setback Non-conforming Structure: Partially Removed The current sailing center, Rosekran’s home, is a nonconforming building subject to the nonconforming constraints. The location of the building, about 7 feet from the west property line, causes the nonconformity.

Although not a part of the zoning ordinance, the Wayzata Building Inspector is inter- preting “remodel” to include removal of the current structure as long as one foundation wall and the first floor remain intact and are all-salvageable. Salvageable means that major structural parts cannot be added. The building inspector and the city manager make a determination if the proposal is a remodel or demolition. If it is a demolition then the new building needs to conform to all the current regulations including the 15 foot setback. If it is determined to be a remodel a new structure could have a seven-foot setback (current Rosekran’s home setback) rather than a 15-foot setback from the west property line by leaving a salvageable existing west wall, salvageable foundation and salvageable first floor in place.

Fences and landscaping: Screening is required along the boundary of non-residential property when it abuts a residential property or is across the street from a residential zone. The area of land that is between the building and the street is considered the front yard. Fences not higher then 42 inches and not more than 50% opaque are allowed in the front yard. Except for a sight visibility triangle on corner lots, fences up to 6 feet in height can be located in the front yard as long as they are meant to screen and are at least 10 feet from the roadway. There are not any restrictions on the height of hedges used for fences. The city council can allow exceptions to these standards by use of a conditional use permit.

Non-residential property is required to be landscaped. The amount and placement of the landscaping is determined by a landscape plan with the size and type of the planting material listed in the ordinance.

Signs: With performance standards, a 6-square foot with a maximum height of 5 feet identifi- cation sign is allowed in R1 (club house) but not in the R2-A (sailing center) zoning districts.

Storage: The city ordinance is conflicted concerning storage. One section allows non residential uses to store equipment (boats and trailers, etc.) in an enclosed building or to be fully screened. Another section allows storage in the side yard and not in the front yard or lake yard without regard to screening. The more restrictive requirement would most likely apply.

21 Attachment F

Conditional Use Permits: WYC and WCSC Entitlement History The following air photo visually identifies various properties owned by WYC and WCSC

Lot 2 sliver of land between the club house circle drive eastward: WYC began in 1964 on a small piece of property formerly owned by Reid’s Boat Sales. The lakeshore property, located east of the clubhouse property adjacent to the Lake contains approximately 7,173 square feet (identified as lot 2 on the above air photo), From 1964 until the first conditional use permit was issued in 1974, WYC changed the property’s focus to sailing and continued to operate and use it as a marina. This property is currently zoned R-1 single family and is shown on the Compre- hensive Plan as “estate single family land use” rather than semi pubic/private. This land use designation is a serious concern to the club.

Lot 3 Clubhouse Property: In 1974, WYC acquired the Leckas’ property (lot 3 on the attached air photo), which had also been operated as a marina. This property contains approximately 12,706 square feet. In 1974, WYC submitted a unified site plan of the Reid’s property (Lot 2) and the Leckas’ property (Lot 3) to the City. This plan included 31 parking spaces on gravel parking lot; one stall for every 2 boat slips (additional stalls were leased from the property west of the Leckas site) and 59 boat slips. On February 5, 1974, the City Council issued a conditional use permit to “operate a private sailboat club” and it granted two variances to the City Code: one to allow a five-foot parking lot setback to the north and west property lines and a variance to allow a limestone or gravel parking lot rather than a bituminous lot. The Council provided its approval with only the condition that the improvements conform to the submitted WYC uniform site plan.

22 Attachment F

By 1979, WYC was ready to tear down the Leckas’ buildings that served as a clubhouse and build the present clubhouse structure. The City Council granted the building permit and amended the 1976 conditional use permit agreement allowing a 2300 square foot building including a caretaker’s apartment. Significantly, it granted two variances: one to allow a 5-foot building setback from Eastman Lane and the other to allow 44-foot setback from the lake. The action applied to both the Reid’s property and the Leckas property. The clubhouse property (Lot 3) is currently zoned R-1 single family residential and is planned semi public private land use in the city’s comprehensive plan.

Lot 1 East Parking Lot: This property, zoned R-1 single family and planned as semi public/private land use, was acquired in 1976. The property contains approximately 88,033 square feet between then County Road 16 (Eastman Lane), the railroad right-of-way, and west of County Road 101(Bushaway Road at the time State Trunk Highway 101). WYC acquired the property, known as the Bell’s Property (lot 1 on the attached air photo), in response to a growing issue about congested parking conditions on Eastman Lane. WYC proposed to use Bell’s property as a parking lot primarily to provide overflow parking on summer weekends when parking along Eastman Lane was congested. Although purchased to resolve an issue, WYC was limited by the City Council to only 69 parking spaces. The property can environmentally and aesthetically accommodate 200 parking spaces with screening and protecting the existing utilities. In addition, the conditional use permit required WYC to make lake shore improvements to Reid’s property (lot 2), limited the buoy field to 30 buoys within 400 feet of the shore, and limit the parking lot use. The resulting conditional use permit took the then nonconforming status away from Reid’s property (lot 2), and imposed conditions on Bell’s property (lot 1), Reid’s property (lot 2), and clubhouse property (Leckas, lot 3). How- ever, it did not repeal the 1974 setback variances on Leckas (lot 3).

The conditions imposed by the 1976 Conditional Use Permit allowing a 69-space parking lot on Bell (lot 1) are summarized as: 1. All landscaping, plantings as per the approved site plan; 2. Trash to be kept in an approved dumpster and the area to be kept clean and free of trash and debris; 3. The number of boat slips not to exceed 97 and the number of mooring buoys beyond 30 (127 total). The location of both the slips and the buoys were indicated on a site plan; 4. The number and size of structures in the clubhouse area could not be increase (this was later amended) and no structures are allowed on lot 1(Bell property); 1. The allowed limestone parking lot on the Bell property could not be enlarged; 2. No boat trailers are to be parked on the Bell site, clubhouse (Leckas site) or on land that was being leased at the time west of the clubhouse site (west parking lot); 3. The Bell property (known in the agreement as the “parking lot site”) was not to be used for any use except parking lot and then only during the boating season; 4. The Bell property could not be used between the hours of 11:00 PM and 8:00 AM Monday Through Thursday and could not be used between the hours o 12:00AM

23 Attachment F

and 8:00 AM Friday Through Sunday; 5. Should WYC not have control of the parking area (Bell property) the parking lot was to be abandoned and the limestone area covered with grass.

The property (Bell lot one) is restricted in its use by an electric power easement and sanitary sewer and water easement including sewage lift station. The use of the land is also restricted by the seven foot depth of the city water lines that transverse the property.

An amendment to the 1976 agreement (Bell, Reid’s’ and Leckas properties) stipu- lated that the total number of slips and buoys associated with this property would not exceed 127 and the buoy field would not extend more than 400 feet into the lake. Al- though the shoreline for this property is 540 feet long, the current LMCD dock permit reflects this agreement.

In 1990 due to low water, WYC obtained permission to temporarily move its buoy field from 400 feet to 800 feet. It appears; at this time is when City authorized limited parking on the edge of Eastman Lane designating it for vehicles with trailers only. The WYC has for 45 years been mostly a sailboat marina. However, in 1989-90 with record low water, the WYC could not moor 4-foot draft sailboats in many marina locations. Members parked their sailboats in their yard and the club rented the vacant slips to 91 power boats. Without this flexibility, the yacht club could not have survived. Al- though a sail boat racing and teaching marina, with this history in mind, the yacht club will continue to require this flexibility.

Lot 4 West Parking Lot: In 1986, WYC acquired the old Tibbits & Wise Boat Works land from the trust repre- senting the Wayzata Bay Association, which had purchased the land from the boat works in 1944. This Tibbits & Wise Boat Works (lot 4 on the attached air photo) land had been leased by WYC for parking for number of years. The use of this land as a marina, well documented in the history section of this hand book, is a nonconforming use in an R2A single family residential zoning district and is shown on the comprehensive plan as semi public/private land use which includes the use as a yacht club (private recreational use). One section (801.01.5) of the zoning ordinance indicates that as a legally existing use at the time of its adoption, the use would now be considered a conditional land use in this zoning district. This zoning section explains the former planner’s recommendation and the use of a conditional use permit to allow the jib crane.

Lot 5 Sailing Center (Hague- Rosekran’s Property): The property, located at 456 Arlington Circle, known as the Rosekran’s property (lot 5 on the attached air photo), was acquired in 2007 for a sailing school. Sailing School is an allowed land use in the R-2A residential zoning district with a conditional use permit. The City Council issued the permit, with conditions, in May 2008.

Besides being subject to all the extensive regulations in the R2A, Flood Protection

24 Attachment F

and Shoreland Overlay zoning districts, the City Council placed the additional conditions on the property (paraphrased):  Joint parking with the WYC;  No parking or drop off on Arlington Circle;  Securing other necessary permits and the Fire Marshall’s approved use of the building. It is significant that the city Council’s minutes mentions “filling and other requirements” meaning that WSCS and the City realized that some of the property is located below the 100-year regional flood elevation resulting in a limited use of this area.

Conditional Use Permit Discussion: Minnesota law provides that conditional land uses are allowed “by right” in a zoning district as long as the conditions for issuing the conditional use permit are satisfied. The burden of proof to show that the conditions are satisfied lies with the applicant, but should the city council turn down a conditional use permit the burden of proof at the district court lies with the city to show that the conditions for issuing a conditional use permit were not satisfied. The law provides that secondary conditions imposed by the city council, as well as the primary conditions specified in the zoning ordinance for issuing a conditional use permit must be reasonable and not curtail the reasonable use of the property for the allowed conditional use. Conditional uses also run with the land and not with ownership.

The conditional use permit process is a city quasi-judicial /administrative process rather than a legislative process. As such, a city council cannot arbitrarily impose conditions. In Wayzata, the conditions need to address the following criteria for issuing a conditional use permit: The proposed action in relation to the specific policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The use's compatibility with present and future uses of the area. The use's conformity with all performance standards. The proposed use's effect on the area in which it is proposed. The proposed use's impact upon property values in the area in which it is developed. Traffic generated by the proposed use is in relation to capabilities of streets serving the property. WSCS and WYC are located on a Collector Street. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including parks, schools, streets, utilities, and the City's service capacity.

Although common in many municipal zoning ordinances, the vagueness of some of these conditions leave the city, neighborhood and property owner vulnerable to court actions that could over turn a city council’s decision. As a general zoning phiosphy

Public Streets: The streets in this area, with the exception of the Eastman Lane, Arlington Circle, and Lake Street combination (old County Road 16), are local residential streets without curb and gutter. The streets ,which at one time were designated as County

25 Attachment F

Road 16 are classified a major collector street in the city’s comprehensive plan.

Eastman Lane, a 26-foot wide two lane street that in 1999 and in 2005 had a traffic volume of 6,100 Average Daily Traffic (ADT). At the current time or in the future according to the comprehensive plan, Eastman Lane has not been identified as having capacity deficiencies or transportation issues The comprehensive plan retains Eastman Lane as a two-lane street. The city’s comprehensive plan shows Eastman Lane as having an existing bike/walk trail that currently exists as wid- ened, paved shoulders, as constructed by Hennepin County in 2001. The right-of- way, easement and implied use is variable from 26 feet in the area of the yacht club’s west parking lot and sailing center (implied use) to 39 feet adjacent to the club house (implied use) and 66 feet along the east parking lot (plated right-of- way). Implied use means that the city or county do not have dedicated or easement right-of-way, but have used and maintained the street for a number of years and can continue to use and maintain the street in the future.

Although the 66-foot right-of-way width is typical and the speed is typical of a former county road, the right-of-way widths, which are within the city’s control and the speeds, which are controlled by the state, are not typical of a community wish- ing to retain small town character. Because speeds are controlled by the state, the process for reducing the speed limit involves the following: When the city believes that the existing speed limit upon any street or highway within its jurisdic- tions and not a part of the state trunk highway system is greater or less than is reasonable or safe driving under existing conditions, they may request the state to authorize, upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation, the erection of appropriate signs designating what speed is reasonable and safe. If the traveled speed on the street is less than the posted speed the state may reduce the speed limit, but if the traveled speed is greater the state may increase the speed limit. Speed limits can also be reduced by designing the street with traffic calming measures that are discussed at the end of this hand book.

Traffic, bicycle, and pedestrian safety on Eastman Lane, an identified issue from the interviews, would be greatly improved by using the methods contained in the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) publication“ Context Sensitive Street Solu- tions”. Part of the ITE publication is included as a “white paper” in this hand book.

Existing Comprehensive Plan Standards for local and collector streets: Functional Classification Local Street Collector Street (Eastman) Right-of-Way 50 -80 ft 60-100 ft Capacity 8,000 to 10,000 ADT 8,000 to 10,000 ADT Speeds Maximum 30MPH 30 to 40 MPH

The problem with updating Eastman Lane is the amount of right-of way (34 feet in some locations). Because of this restriction, the city should be encouraged to work with the railroad to use part of the railroad’s right-of-way for street improvements. A discussion of street widths, pedestrian amenities, cleaning pollutants from storm water runoff is provided in an attached “white paper”.

26 Attachment F

Detail Streets in the Planning Area: Arlington Circle: Arlington Circle is a platted undeveloped 60-foot wide public street right-of-way running from the lake to what some of the neighbors think is a precarious intersection with Shady Lane and Eastman Lane.

The street is used for: fire truck access to the lake, limited staff access to the WCSC office and winter recreational parking and access to the lake. Except in the winter, parking is not allowed on the street. Our parking study conducted between July 6 and Sep- tember 3, 2009, indicated an average of one car parked on the street on Thursday evening race night. Eastman Lane, Shady Lane, Arlington Circle intersection, Arlington Circle intersects Lake with railway crossing medi- Street north of the railroad tracks. ans Shady Lane, Eastman Lane, Ar- Source: City of Wayzata lington Circle and a private driveway that used to be the main entrance to the Eastman Estate form the intersection at WSCS’s northwest corner. These three streets coming together at this location, along with the newly installed median have, in the opinion of one of the neighbor’s, created traffic turning movement issues.

Traffic accident reports indicate that this intersection has had a number of minor traffic accidents. Although primarily the result of the sharp curve at this location, eight of the 14 reported 2005-2009 traffic accidents between Lake Street and Bushaway Road occurred at this intersection.

Central Avenue Boat Launch: The Central Avenue public boat launch operates as a city facility with a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) agreement. This part of Central Ave was plated, as a 33-foot wide public street right-of-way in 1888 as part of the Arlington Heights subdivision. Although there was a Torrens action in 1937 that registered the lake end of the avenue, this action would, by state statute, not affect the public street right-of-way that extends to the lake, but does effect the underlying property rights. The 1997 cooperative agreement with the DNR indicates that the City had historically operated the street as a public boat launch and specifies that the street would be used as a public boat launch perpetually unless the City provides a “similar or higher quality alternative” public launch. Other pertinent public launch conditions contained in the DNR agreement include: unless in an emergency, the ramp is to remain open year around, 24 hours per day; maintenance is to be provided by the City; City cannot re- strict its use based on parking, boat size, place of residence, or boat engine horse power. Its use can be restricted based on “surface water use zoning regulations” .

27 Attachment F

Because only the LMCD and DNR control the surface water use, It’s our opinion that these are DNR or LMCD zoning regulations.

The 2004 DNR aerial survey indicates that the average daily public boat ramp use on weekends is 13.2 boats and the average daily use on weekdays is 6.6 boats. As part of the parking study conducted by Midwest Planning & Design in the summer of 2009, WYC parking attendants counted 6 vehicles and trailers parked on Eastman Lane on Thursday evenings and 8 parked on Eastman Lane on Sunday afternoons. Neither of these studies account for days when the ramp is used for fishing tourna- ment lake access. Personal observation and anecdotal information indicates that the use is substantially more intense during these events. From interviews conducted with ramp users, it appears the ramp is a favorite for professional anglers and non- riparian Wayzata residents because of its convenient location and because of the ex- tra time that it takes to launch a boat at the pubic launch in Gray’s Bay and then to get out of Gray’s Bay.

A search of accident records from 2005 to date found one accident recorded that related to the boat ramp and this one was a car avoiding another car and hitting the rear of a parked trailer. An interview with the Sheriff's Water Patrol indicated that there were no known accidents at the ramp from 1993 to the present. However, the sheriff’s records are incomplete. In addition, WYC members have related one serious accident with injuries related to this ramp.

The Wayzata Fire Department retains the access for fire protection and will required continuous access to the lake. It is highly unlikely that the City would consider vacat- ing the Avenue, because of its past and public uses and the limited public access to the lake within Wayzata.

Eastman Lane: For a number of years Hennepin County has been working with the city and the neighborhood including WYC to design major changes to Bushaway Road (County State Aid Highway 101) and limited changes to Eastman Lane. To this end some time ago, the County worked with WYC to develop the alternative Eastman Lane Plan. However, a city task force and the county have been working to modify that alignment. The most recent plan can be found at the end of this hand book.

Traffic: Cut-through traffic in the Old Holdridge Neighborhood was identified as one of the WYC issues. An origin and destination study, completed as part of the proposed Bay Center redevelopment, studied cut-through traffic in the Old Holdridge Neighborhood at midday and in the PM hours. In summary the study concludes: a large percentage of existing traffic in the neighborhood east of the proposed Wayzata Bay Center Re- development is cut-through traffic. The primary cut through route is Central Avenue South and Circle Drive East (61% of the cut through traffic).

There is not a significant difference in cut-through traffic between the study at midday

28 Attachment F

and the study at the PM hours; indicating that the majority of the cut-through issue is not associated with WYC in that WYC primary traffic generation time period is in the PM hours. If WYC was a primary contributor to cut-through traffic a surge would be present in the late PM time period.

Although there was not significant rail traffic during the study period to corroborate the assumption, the traffic pattern of Lake Street / LaSalle Street is a logical cut-through route for vehicles avoiding the at-grade rail crossing when trains are present.

However, without trains present, the traffic pattern of Central Avenue / LaSalle Street showed that there was no significant cut-through of traffic avoiding County Road 101, Wayzata Boulevard and Bushaway Road.

Since traffic volumes are well below levels that would raise any capacity concerns, the issue with the cut-through traffic is not operational. HRG (the consultant conduct- ing the study) believes the issue is unsafe driver behavior through the neighborhood. The field recorder that was stationed at the intersection of Central Avenue and E Cir- cle Drive observed a large number of vehicles failing to stop at the stop sign at this intersection, which was most prevalent with the vehicles traveling south on Central Avenue. This creates safety concerns with both pedestrians and vehicles turning north onto Central Avenue from Circle Drive East.”

HRG recommends improving major roads to reduce delays, improving driver aware- ness and improving enforcement as solutions to the cut-through traffic. Although, this study indicates that cut through traffic is not primarily a WYC issue, there are several traffic calming devices and designs that could be installed to discourage cut-through traffic. The use of these devices in other communities has proven to be very effective to reducing cut-through traffic and reducing speeds.

Utilities: Public sanitary sewer and domestic water are provided to the clubhouse and sailing center property through connections in Eastman Lane.

The sailing center property is serviced by a 6 inch water main and by an 8 inch sanitary sewer that extends from Lake Street. The clubhouse is serviced by a 6 inch water main that extends from Reno street to Eastman Lane. Sanitary Sewer is provided by the 8 inch line from the east.

The Metropolitan Council’s 24 inch force main, located north of the railroad tracks in the railroad right-of-way, links Wayzata, Orono ,and Minnetonka Beach to a sewage treatment plant on the Minnesota River. The existing force main turns to the south under the tracks into the yacht club’s east property, runs along the north edge of the east property, then south along Bushaway Road. The Metropolitan Council plans to provide a parallel force main. The location of the new force main has not been determined. This force main easement along with 6 inch and 10 inch water main easements bisect

29 Attachment F

the yacht club’s east parking lot. The drawings on the this page illustrate the various utilities in the east parking area.

Metropolitan sanitary sewer force main location and depth note large plan format will be available at the charrette or on line at yacht club web site

Location of both 6 inch water main ( blue line closer to Bushaway Road), the 10 inch water main (blue line) and the metropolitan force main (black line) and pumping station in the east property. With less than 7 feet of cover in some areas, the elevation of the east property in the location of the water mains can not be lowered

30 Attachment F

The City’s Surface Water Quality Management Plan indicates a new storm sewer pipe is planned along the sailing center’s north lot line to the channel. There are not any other sediment ponds or other facilities planned for the property or the surrounding streets.

An existing storm water pipe connects a large part of the Old Holdridge Neighborhood under WYC property to an outfall at the Lake.

The Plan also indicates that the planned maximum impervious surface for the sailing center and west parking lot ( R-2A zoning district) is 30% and the clubhouse property and east parking lot (R-1 zoning district) is 25%

Summary of Site and Natural Resource Information: The following is a summary of pertinent physical information : Wetlands: Although there are extensive wetlands located north of the rail way, in the rail right-of-way, only a small wet land exists on the yacht club’s east property.

Wetlands Source: MCWD with modifications by Svoboda Ecological Services

31 Attachment F

Lake Minnetonka: The lake’s Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) is 929.4 feet above sea level. The regional 100-year flood plain is 931.1 feet which means that the lowest inhabitable space (basement elevation) for new buildings needs to be at least 1-foot above the 100-year flood elevation. There are not any known fisheries along the shore associated with the WYC or WCSC property.

The lowest recorded Lake level was in 1937 at 922.08 feet with the most recent low level in 1990 at 925.42 feet. The Gray’s Bay dam outlet to Minnehaha Creek is closed when the lake’s level reaches 928.6 feet. The adjacent chart indicates lake levels since 2000. This wide fluctuation in lake levels leaves the club vulnerable to not being able to provide moorage for keel boats.

Natural Resource Study: In summary, natural resource study conducted for the Hennepin County Department of Environmental services indicates the following:  The neighborhood including WYC and WCSC was once part of the Min- nesota’s “Big Woods”, which included Oak , Maple, Basswood as predomi- nated species. The WYC and WCSC property was oak with openings and barrens.  Natural Communities: Although small remnants are located north of the railroad, not any “Big Woods” remnants of pre-settlement vegetation exists on WYC or WCSC property. The County Biological Survey lists four rare animal occurrences within one mile of the City including Acadian Flycatcher, Pugnose Shiner, and Red-shouldered hawk. One neighbor reported seeing a snow owl, turkey, Carolina Wren, Yellow Billed Kooley, mink, possum, deer and fox in the Old Holdridge Neighborhood including the east parking lot.

A cultural research study conducted by Westwood professional services for the yacht club concludes that not any cultural sites or protected species were found on the sites.

Soils : The east parking area appears to be Hayden Loam soils. The Hayden (Hbc) soils (blue area) have high available moisture with water table of 5 feet in every season.

32 Attachment F

The surface layer is easily eroded. Subsurface correction would be required for structures and paved surfaces on these soils. The area where the sailing center home is located (light green area) appears to be lake beach sandy (lc). These soils tend to be stable with low shrink swell potential. As expected, the water table is high limiting the potential for base- ments. The rest of the sailing center property as well as the west parking lot, club house area and strip of land east of the club house was once a marsh (MA) that has been filled. The soils under the fill are peaty muck over loam. The water table is probably at the same level as the lake. Base- ments and footings for buildings are not recom- mended on this soil type and even paved parking Soils map: WYC and WCSC are lo- lots would not prove to be stable unless the soil cated in the brown area, which was were removed.

Soil test conducted in the lower areas of the sailing center confirm the marsh type conditions with about 12 feet of peaty muck type soils.

Historic and Cultural Resource Information: Neighborhood Historical Foundation: Although it is thought that Eastern Dakota Sioux lead by Chief Shakopee use Carpen- ter’s Point as a hunting camp, historical records do not locate any Native American bur- ial mounds on WYC or WCSC property.

Old Holdridge neighborhood was designed uniquely as a late Victorian era railroad suburb with large lots, public spaces, mews, and curvilinear streets. The Holdridge Passenger Railway Depot provided the anchor for the neighborhood’s early development. The stationmaster’s house still exists in the neighborhood. It was from near this station that some of the steamboats that plied the lake were docked as well as Wise’s first dance pavilion at the lake’s edge. Both the Arlington Hotel and Northland Inn, a favorite place for Chicago vacationers, were located in the neighborhood. Thomas and Harry Wise of the Tibbits & Wise Boat Works lived just north of the tracks.

Past neighborhood residents read like a Who’s Who directory of Minneapolis business leaders including such names as: Piper, Nash, Smith, Eastman, Sweatt and Rand. The architects who designed the homes, at least along Bushaway Road and Shady Lane, include some of Minnesota’s most famous architects.

Yacht Club and Sailing Center History: Strip of Land East of the Clubhouse Property: WYC began in 1964 on a small piece of property formerly owned by Reid’s Boat Sales. was immediately adjacent to a commercial marina operated by the Leckas family (Club house property). When WYC acquired the Reid’s property, it was used as a marina with boat rentals and docks. There were no structures on the land. One of the inter-

33 Attachment F

viewed neighbors remembers renting fishing boats on a number of occasions from the Reid’s.

Club House Property: In 1974, WYC acquired the Leckas’ property (known as the “Greeks”) which had also been operated as a marina. The property contained two buildings, one was the Leckas’ home and the other building an unidentified use, but probably boat rental and storage building, docks and other related marina uses. One of the “Greek’s” buildings was built on the Central Ave right-of-way. In 1979, WYC demolished the Leckas’ buildings that served as a clubhouse and build the present clubhouse. The new club house contains a large meeting room, catering kitchen area, bath and changing rooms and an entrance area. There is an apartment above part of the clubhouse. The area outside contains patios, the deck areas, drop off area, driveways, storage area and enclosed trash area, sidewalk, trees and grass.

East Parking Lot: In 1976, WYC acquired approximately 88,033 square feet between County Road 16 (Eastman Lane) the railroad right-of-way and west of County Road 101(Bushaway Road). At one time this property was the location for the Great Northern Railroads’ Holdridge Depot and a staging area for the massive steamboats docked nearby on the lake.

West Parking Lot: In 1986, WYC acquired the old Tibbets & Wise Boat Works land from the trust repre- senting the Wayzata Bay Association, which had purchase the land from the boat works in 1944. This land had been leased by WYC for parking for number of years.

The Tibbets & Wise Boat Works occupied lot 3 from 1908 until 1934 . The Boat Works, operating out of three buildings, built pleasure boats, stored boats and rented boats on the property. In 1912, the company appears to have received a State of Minnesota dredging permit and created the channel that is located on the west side of the property. It is likely that at one time the channel extended into the property that was acquired in 1914 by Hague (Hague-Rosekran’s property). The dredging spoils were used to make the existing island, which was somewhat larger than it is today, had a small building on it, and for many years was tree covered. The Boy Scouts used the island and its small building for a number of years. Dredging Plan with 3 buildings shown Shortly after 1919, Harry Wise Source: Minnesota Historical Society

34 Attachment F

opened and operated a dance pavilion on the east end of the dredge spoils island.

Two Boat Works’ buildings and the dance pavilion were destroyed in 1925 and the re- maining building burned in 1932, but the boat works continued on the site until1934. After the company was liquidated, Wise continued to used the site as a marina with boats stored on the site in a long corrugated metal building on the east side of the dredge channel. The channel was kept open and the boats were brought up the channel for storage.

In 1944, Wayzata Bay Associates, who sold it by a contract for deed to Boyer, acquired the site. Boyer, in 1982, tried unsuccessfully to subdivide the property into 3 single family lots and continued to operate the marina until the property was sold to WYC by a trust in 1986. WYC has used the lot as a marina since its acquisition. The property is used for marina parking, limited boat storage and access to Pictures courtesy of Gordon Gunlock the lake.

Sailing Center Property: After unsuccessfully trying to locate a sailing school building on the west lot, the Way- zata Sailing Foundation (Wayzata community Sailing Center) purchased the property and house, located at 456 Arlington Circle and known as the Rosekrans’ property .

This property has an interesting history. A local plumbing contractor Hague, had the 1890 “gable roofed suburban cottage” type house, once in Woodland, dragged across the bay over the ice in 1914. Once in place, the rear two-story area and the two story front porch were added. The Hague/Rosekrans House home originally owned by Hague was occupied Source: Historical and Architectural Resources by two women until 1931, at which time it was of Wayzata, July 2003 abandon, but left open with much of the furniture intact. The empty home, which was not vandal- ized until later, made a convenient changing room for swimmers and emergency shel- ter for picnickers and boaters using the Arlington Circle for lake access. The Rosek- rans family moved into the home in 1943 after their feed store burned and lived in the home until it was purchased by WCSC in 2007.

“The structure’s historical significance lies in its relation to the themes of domestic architecture and lake shore residential development associated within the context of Wayzata’s Guilder Age (1867-1929).” The City’s Historic Preservation Commission designated the site as a number one priority heritage preservation site. However,

35 Attachment F

unless the owner agrees to the designation it has no affect. Neither Rosekrans nor WCSC agreed to the designation as a heritage preservation site.

The Wayzata Sailing Foundation, in an effort to preserve the property, had it sur- veyed for historic restoration and found that the structural defects, modifications required by code and costs made restoration prohibitive.

Central Avenue Public Boat Launch: Central Avenue (boat launch) was plated, as a 33-foot wide public street in 1888 as part of the Arlington Heights Subdivision. Although there was a Torrens action in 1937 that registered the lake end of the Avenue, this action would, by statute, not affect the public street that extends to the lake. For a number of years this small section of Central Avenue was used as a summer and winter public boat launch. When the yacht club began winter bubbling to preserve the dock structures, the city moved the winter access to Arlington Circle. At one time part of Leckas home, which was converted to the club house, extended into Central Avenue. When the home was removed, the new clubhouse was built east of Central Avenue. Today the Ave- nue is used by cooperative agreement with the DNR as a public boat launch.

Over the years, conflicts between the club, the city, and the fishing community have resulted from the location of this launch. To reduce some of the conflicts, the club installed fence on both sides, a dock for the launch users, and bollards to protect the trees. The club dredges the access to the launch and provides the launch dock.

Central Avenue is somewhat narrower The launch is a source of siltation to the lake with than the launch area in that club’s land extends to the white bollards on storm water from Eastman Lane eroding the gravel the right and the tree on the left into the lake. Likewise, the “power on boat recovery” erodes the lake bed. The city provides an unsightly potable toilet for summer use, and the DNR inspects boats and and provides invasive species education information at the launch.

Arlington Circle South: Platted as a public street with the Arlington Heights Subdivision, this street has been a popular access to the lake and a gathering place. At one time a public Gordon Gunlock and his mother on public dock at the end of Arlington dock, located at the end of Arlington Circle, provided: Circle. Note Tibbets &Wise Boat fishing, bathing, teen hangout and swimming oppor- Works Building in the back ground tunities for the near by residents. It was also a local night time hangout for older teens and young adults. This undeveloped street has limited summer use, but is a primary access point for winter recreational uses.

36 Attachment F

Neighborhood Folder The neighborhood folder provides a visual view analysis of the yacht club and sailing center from the neighborhood and also a context analysis of the neighborhood architecture. The vision statement provides: “located on an important gateway to the community, compatible with the neighborhood and the neighborhood’s architecture”. To accomplish this vision, the context analysis can be used as a design tool.

View Analysis In the fall of 2009 and Spring of 2010, Midwest Planning & Design took pictures of the views from a number of homes that look over the lake. The following is an analysis of those views:  East parking lot: Because part of the yacht club’s east lot is depressed and because of the dense vegetation, except for Eide and a small area from Amdahl, the homes north of the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Rail Road do not have a view of the east parking lot in either leaf on and leaf off times of the year. However, two of the homes (Roberts and Braden) have long views above the east lot of the lake. The parking lot has an elevation that ranges from 932 ft to 934 ft to 944 ft to 950 ft in the upper lot. The top of the railway grade is 942 feet opposite the lower lot and 944 ft opposite the upper lot. Homes in this area have second floor elevations ranging from 936 ft to 960 feet.

 East marina, clubhouse, west parking lot and sailing center. The homes opposite the club house and west parking lot have rather clear views of the lake. These homes belonging to Borg Babcock, Ludescher, 1050 Lake Street, Patterson and Penningroth have varying views but generally clear views of the clubhouse, east marina, and west parking lot including the public launch. Not any of the homes have a leaf on view of the existing sailing center building. Both Apartment buildings have long views of the lake and can view the top of the club house. The rail road in this location ranges from 938 feet to 940 feet. The homes’ second stories range from 950 feet to 956 feet.

 Other views The home adjacent to Arlington Circle (Basset) has a view of the sailing center lake yard from the second story. The properties east of the yacht club have long views of the marina, club house and sailing center. Some concern was expressed in the interviews about the marina views.

The table on the following page describes each property’s view. The view analysis diagram (next page) also shows the views from each property and provides pictures of each property. The scale in this book is rather limited. A large diagram will be available at the charrette.

37 Attachment F

View Analysis

View of Estimated Distance Vegeta- Top of rail- East Lot Leaf On Leaf off Upper East Upper floor tion road grade Elevation Lot elevation Eide 960 ft 254 ft Heavy 944 ft 946 ft Limited visi- Clear visibility bility

Connelly 932 345 ft Heavy 944 ft 944 ft Not visible Not visible

Amdahl 944 ft 340 ft Heavy 944 ft 944 ft Limited visi- Limited visi- Thonton Small bility bility opening Roberts 953 ft 185 ft Heavy SE 942 ft 934 ft Not visible Not visible Clear Long view of Long view of south and the lake the lake south west Braden 953 256 ft Relatively 942 ft 934 ft Not visible Not visible clear Long view of Long view of Heavy the lake the lake south east

1320 La- Not avail- 436 ft Heavy 940 ft 930 ft Not visible Not visible Salle 305 able Lacher Borg Bab- 950 ft 266 ft Heavy 940 ft 930 ft Not visible Not visible cock View of Estimated Distance Vegeta- Top of rail- East Lot Leaf On Leaf off East Ma- Upper floor tion road grade Elevation rina and elevation Club House Borg Bab- 950 ft 231 ft Relatively 940 ft 930 ft Clear Clear cock 294 ft clear 940 ft 948 ft Clear Clear

Ludescher 950 ft 231 ft Clear 940 ft 930 ft Clear Clear 248 ft 940 ft 948 ft Clear Clear

Hampton 946 ft 423 ft Moder- 940 ft 930 ft Obstructed Obstructed Apts. 402 ft ately 940 ft 948 ft

Central Ave. 944 ft 356 ft Light 940 ft 930 ft Obstructed Obstructed Apts. 948 ft Clear to top Clear to top of of club house club house 1050 Lake 954 ft 358 ft Moderate 938 ft 930 ft Clear SE Clear SE street 378 ft 938 ft 948 ft Obstructed Obstructed south west south west Patterson 956 ft 351 ft Light 938 ft 930 ft Clear south Clear south 393 ft south and 938 ft 948 ft and SE Ob- and SE , Ob- SE Heavy structed south structed south SW west west Penningroth 950 ft 422 ft Light 938 ft 930 ft Clear south Clear south south and 948 ft and SE Ob- and SE Ob- SE Heavy structed south structed south SW west west

38 Attachment F

Note: larger diagram will be available at the charrette or can be views at the yacht club web site

39 Attachment F

Neighborhood context: The purpose of this section is to acquaint the stakeholder with the architectural character in the neighborhoods. The Architecture relates to the Vision Statement.

Shady Lane Neighborhood: This Arlington Heights Subdivision, which is in proximity to the sailing center, consists of a mix of older estate architecture, and new estate homes that have replaced some of the original dwellings.

Source: Google Maps

Once dominated by the Eastman Estate, the following types of architecture appear in this neighborhood:

40 Attachment F

Bushaway Neighborhood: The homes in this neighborhood, as well as the others are used to understand the architectural context. With an exception, the homes in this neighborhood are newer estate homes typified by the following:

Source: Google Maps

41 Attachment F

Old Holdridge Neighborhood: This generally modest neighborhood located north of the sailing center and yacht club has a variety of housing types including single family bungalow, cape cod, split levels to post war homes such as ramblers and a scattering of multifamily dwellings.

Source: Google Maps

42 Attachment F

43 Attachment F

Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) and Department of Natural Re- sources (DNR) Folder The watershed district is governed by a board of governors appointed by the Hennepin County Board. It operates with the authority of the state for protection of the lake and its environs. In addition, many of the powers of the DNR have been delegated by cooperative agreement to the Watershed District. The district enforces its rules in the following areas:  Erosion Control Grading of 5,000 square feet or more. Stockpiling or excavation of more than 50 cubic yards of material or more.  Floodplain Alteration Any activity that proposes to place fill of any type in a 100 year floodplain associated with a lake, river, stream, wetland, or any other water basin.  Wetland Protection All projects associated with the draining, filling, excavation, or alteration of a wetland. Work in wetlands may also require a Wetland Conservation Act permit issued through MCWD or local municipality.  Shoreline and Stream Bank Improvement All shoreline and stream bank improvements, including but not limited to rip rap, retaining walls, sheet piling, and boat ramps. All sand blanket projects including family beaches.  Stream and Lake Crossings Placement of roads, highways, or utilities in the bed of a protected water or wet land. Construction of a bridge or related crossing of a water, waterway or wetland. Placement of a culvert or similar structure in the bed or channel of a protected water or wetland.  Storm water Management All residential, commercial, institutional, industrial, or public land development projects that will increase the area of impervious surface or change land con tours to alter the drainage ways, increase peak runoff rates, or affect the quality of storm water flows. Single family homes, additions of garages, decks, etc. are exempt from this rule but may require a permit under one of the other rules.  Dredging Dredging is one of the most stringently applied rules the District implements. The DNR promulgated dredging regulation that are enforced by MCWD. The language of the dredging rule strives to strike a balance between a riparian property owner’s rights to navigation and the ecological impact caused by dredg ing the lake bed. All dredging permit applications for Lake Minnetonka or Lake Minnetonka tributaries must comply with the provisions of the Lake Minnetonka Dredging Joint Policy Statement.(See white papers).

Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Folder The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) was created by the Legislature in

44 Attachment F

1967. Prior to 1967, the cities managed the waters in their city. The LMCD is governed by a Board of Directors composed of one member appointed by the City Council of each of the 14 cities around the lake.

LMCD power to regulate uses (docks, watercraft, etc) on Lake Minnetonka is superior to municipal powers. Minnesota Statute 103.641: “Subject to the provisions of chapters 97A (game and Fish), 103D(Watershed Districts), 103E (Drainage), 103G (DNR and waters of the State), and 115(Water Pollution Control and Sanitary Districts), and the rules and regulations of the respective agencies and governing bodies vested with jurisdiction and authority under those chapters, the LMCD has the following powers on Lake Minnetonka:  to regulate the construction, installation, and maintenance of permanent and temporary docks and moorings consistent with federal and state law;  to regulate the construction, configuration, size, location, and maintenance of commercial marinas and their related facilities including parking areas and sanitary facilities. The regulation shall be consistent with the applicable municipal building codes and zoning ordinances where the marinas are located.”

The LMCD Board reviews various license application requests, considers lake studies, develops measures to control the invasion of exotic plants and species (i.e. Eurasian Water milfoil, Zebra Mussels, etc.), and considers other related lake-management issues to improve the public’s enjoyment of the lake.

In establishing the LMCD, the Legislature granted the “Right of Use” for lakeshore property owners to have BSUs (Boat Storage Units such as: docks, slides and buoys), without regard to sail or motor boat. In granting this “right of use”, the legislature has preempted any local ordinances, and has directed the LMCD to establish ordinances governing, among other things, BSUs. A property owner has the right to the maximum number of BSUs allowed by then current LMCD rules/code. Even if the property owner chooses not to use all of its BSUs, they are inherently part of the property and cannot be curtailed by other local ordinances. This vestment can only be curtailed or changed by amending the LMCD Code.

Since 1967 the LMCD has adopted a comprehensive Code of Ordinances to manage and regulate a variety of lake activities. These ordinances include the use of the lake for docking/mooring of boats. However, if a property owner had docks existing at the time the LMCD ordinances were passed, those were considered “legal nonconforming” and were “grandfathered”. For example, the docks at the yacht club east of the public launch ramp extend out 200 ft from the shore and are “grandfathered”. All the sailing center and yacht club docks west of the public launch ramp conform to the LMCD code by extending out 100 feet.

The LMCD defines watercraft as restricted and unrestricted watercraft. Restricted watercraft is any boat that is not classified as an unrestricted watercraft. Unrestricted Wa- tercraft are any boat or vessel for use on, or stored on the lake that is: 16 feet or less in length and which uses a motor of 10 horsepower or less; or 20 feet or less in length

45 Attachment F

which is propelled solely by human power.

The number of restricted watercraft that a property owner can have is regulated by Boat Storage Units (BSU). A BSU means a space or facility (dock, slide or buoy) available for mooring and storing a watercraft. The sailing center and yacht club are allowed one restricted watercraft BSU for each 10 feet of shoreline. The number of unrestricted watercraft at a marina is limited to one per 15 feet of shoreline.

West of the public launch ramp the yacht club and the sailing center have a combined shoreline of 1014 linear feet with an inherent right to 101 BSUs. They currently have 96 BSUs. East of the launch ramp the yacht club has 540 linear feet of shoreline. Be- cause the number of slips and buoys granted by the city as a conditional use permit when it controlled the number of boats on its part of the lake, these BSUs are “grandfathered” by the LMCD to 128 boats on docks and buoys and 18 boats on slides for a total of 146 boats.

The yacht club and sailing center have the following LMCD multiple dock licenses and special density license:  WYC Site 1, east of the public launch ramp, consists of 108 boats at docks and 18 on slides.  WYC Buoy field for 20 buoys.  WYC Site 2 , associated with the west parking lot with 446 linear feet of shoreline consists of 18 boats in the water, 15 slides, 2 transient slips, the jib crane and 30 unregistered kids boats on shore racks. Site 2 has a LMCD special density license for which it offers public amenities in exchange for having one BSU for each 10 ft of shoreline.  WYC Site 3 , the dredge spoils island, with 328 linear feet of shoreline consists of 25 boats in the water and 2 transient docks, a small launch ramp, and 22 unregistered kids boats stored on the land. Site 3 has a LMCD special density license.  WCSC Site 4, the sailing school property with 240 ft of shoreline has 8 boats in the water, 11 slides, and 16 unregulated kid’s boats stored on shore. Site 4 has a special LMCD density license .  Site 2 & 4 have a variance to allow the foot bridge to across the dredge channel.

Boat Density and Special Density License: Except where a public benefit is shown, LMCD rules allow one boat storage unit (BSU) for each 50 feet of shoreline. With the public benefit (public amenity) the yacht club and sailing center entitlement becomes one boat storage unit for each 10 feet of shoreline. The sailing center and yacht club provide a public amenity, which is defined by providing the following amenities: Public Access:  Crane and Launch: The club supplies and maintains the launch dock at the public boat access. The public can use the west parking lot launch ramp and dock on a limited basis to launch unrestricted watercraft. The club provides

46 Attachment F

uses its crane by appointment to non-club members of the community to launch and recover keel boats. The crane is also available to the Wayzata Fire Department and Sheriff’s Water Patrol to recover boats that can not be retrieved by other methods. Training is provided to the Sheriff’s Water Patrol on crane use and sailing.  Emergency recovery: The access dock in the west parking lot is available to the Wayzata Fire Department and the Sheriff’s Water Patrol for emergency recovery and slips are available for impounded boats. A fire lane is maintained to insure emergency recovery access to these docks. Public Lakeshore access and programs:  Collegiate Program for University of Minnesota Sailing and St. Thomas Uni- versity Sailing Programs include: 1) providing teachers and coaches for the sailing teams and the U’s Recreation Sports Sailing Activity, 2) storing the University’s small sailboats on shore and their coach boats, 3) parking, and small boat launching, 4) renting sailboats to students for both racing and rec sports sailing. Also, a complete regatta site for “Big 10” and other college regattas hosted by the universities is available.  Wayzata and Hopkins High School competitive sail boat racing program is provided with lakeshore access, boats, coaching and race regatta space to compete with other schools in the state.  Swimming program for children with adult supervision in the swimming beach area as part of the sailing program.  Adaptive boat program open to the public with handicapped access to ADA docks and a “Hoyer Lift” for handicapped access.  Adaptive sailing program for people with disabilities with regularly scheduled and advertised classes for the public and events for Courage Center and State Services for the Blind.  Primary intermediate and advanced teaching programs are open to the public in a number of children and adult venues.  Environmental programs: These programs include lake environment in the teaching curriculum and regatta boat inspections for invasive species.  Public sail boat racing education and lake environmental programs: These programs include a variety of sail boat racing class room and on the water instruction open to the general public teaching sailing and seamanship.  A variety of yacht club memberships are available to the public at reasonable fees.

Since the city granted a conditional use permit for the sailing center, the center has been organizing its educational functions that separates the students by ages, need for supervision and skills into “class rooms” which enhance safety and supervision. These education functions are further discussed in the sailing center part of the handbook. Without obtaining any additional BSUs that are inherent to the sites, these safety, education and supervision goals require the yacht club and sailing center to request changes to the multiple dock license. The following diagram illustrates those changes:

47 Attachment F

Note: Illustrative Note: Illustrative only subject to revisions Pram and and Pram Adaptive Area Opti Laser Area 420s Area 420s Area

48 Attachment F

Wayzata Yacht Club Folder Mission Statement: The foremost purpose of the Wayzata Yacht Club is the promotion of sailboat racing competition. Through the promotion and development of active and competitive sailboat racing, WYC promotes seamanship and sportsmanship.

WYC also seeks generally to promote the development and popularity of the sport of sailing by:  Providing and promoting an affordable variety of high quality, competitive sailboat racing,  Advance the sport of sailboat racing,  Support other racing programs,  Provide member services,  Promote training and development,  Improve facilities,  Provide a relaxed social environment.

Vision: The Wayzata Yacht Club is a hub of dedicated, passionate sailboat racers nationally recognized for its leadership and growth of a preeminent, innovative regional sailboat racing community.

Description: The Yacht Club was founded in the Spring of 1965 by 15 sailors who had purchased sailboats from Reed’s Quiet World. The new Wayzata Yacht Club formed racing and social programs to enhance Reed’s marina. In the early days, with only the original property, the facilities consisted of a satellite (port-a-potty) on the bulkhead.

The racing schedule was initiated in 1965 with about 16 Ensigns and 15 O’Day day sailors. By 1967 there were 28 Ensigns and 21 Day Sailors plus about 22 other boats. Family membership was originally granted only to these 2 recognized classes. By 1968 there were 30 Ensigns, 32 Day Sailors, and about 35 MORC boats. The PHRF class was added in about 1979. The 70's and early 80's saw a very competitive MORC racing fleet.

In the late 70's a group of sailors made a fleet purchase of the first J24's produced and became the first one design J24 fleet in the world. The early 80's continued with the introduction of the J22 and the creation of J22 Fleet #1. WYC is also home to the re- birth of Capri 25 One Design sailing. Sonar fleet #5 was added in the early 80's along with one design racing for S2 7.9's. WYC is approximately 75% one design racing.

The property west of the turn-a-round to the boat ramp (Leckas) was owned by the Oak Grove Marina, who sold bait and rented slips and fishing boats. After purchasing the property the ramshackle Leckas home was used as a club house for several years. When water and sewer were made available in 1981 WYC razed the home and built

49 Attachment F the current clubhouse.

The property west of the boat launch/clubhouse had been operated as a marina, boat works or boat landing and storage area since the early settlement days. The current channel cut into the land was once covered by a boathouse and was used for floating boats into the workshop. By the 1980’s the existing marina had become a rundown eyesore to the community. WYC attempted to purchase the property, but the membership was unable to agree on a price and the property was sold to a developer. Fortunately, the developer was unable to gain acceptable city permitting, and WYC purchased the marina in 1985.

In 2007, the childhood home of Dave Rosekrans (past US Sailing President) located west of the channel became available. Through the generosity of past commodore Denny Sanford and smaller donors, Wayzata Sailing Foundation purchase the property for just over 2 million dollars The sailing center, a separate entity from the Wayzata Yacht Club, houses Wayzata youth sailing programs, the sailing school, college and H.S. racing programs, and many present and future community programs that would be impractical at the yacht club.

Racing program: The yacht club currently has five one-design fleets (S2 7.9, Ensign, J22, J24, Capri 25, & Sonar) plus racing fleets using PHRF (Performance Handicapped Racing Fleet) and

Sonar: Slop, 25 feet, crew of 3

J 22: Slope, 22 feet ,crew of 3 S2 7.9: Slop, 26 feet, crew of 3

J 24: Slope, 24 feet crew of 3

Capri 25: Slop, 25 feet, crew of 3 MORC & PHRF have a variety of boats

50 Attachment F

MORC ( Midget Ocean Racing Fleet) rules. Club Organization: The club is managed by a 15 member board of directors that are elected by the membership annually with alternating terms. The board is chaired by a “commodore”. Among other things, the board hires a full time club manager. who is responsible to the commodore. Within the club, each fleet has an organization with officers. The fleets are part of national fleet organizations.

Membership: For the last 9 years the membership has been rather constant fluctuating between 550 to 620 members.

Types of Membership:  Honorary Memberships  Full Membership (formerly, Family Membership) is appropriate for those intending to race a boat, moor at the club and vote on club issues. Full membership include spouse and young children. Upon joining, a one-time membership certificate must be purchased.  Skipper Partner Membership (formerly, Annual Membership) are popular for sailors who do not own a boat, but wish to sail. All equity holders in boat partnerships are required to, at a minimum, be Skipper Member at the club.  Crew Membership provides sailors who crew at WYC with club mailings, a club parking sticker, and free access to club facilities.

Membership history by type

Yacht Club Policies: Besides policies related to sail boat racing and racing participation, the club has a number of social policies and cooperative property policies including:  policies designed to limit or control the use of alcohol,  policies related to becoming a full member;  policies related to mooring priority, mooring location, and parking priority,  policies related to guests,  policies related to the use of the club house and grounds including: Noise polices:  The entire WYC facility is to be a quiet area between 10:00 P.M. and 8:00 A.M.  No outdoor speakers shall be used during events except the PA system for announcements during daylight hours. Outdoor speakers or music speakers are not generally allowed during events.  The Board of Directors may approve "Outdoor Live Music up to early evening hours" for a WYC Club Event. Such approval requires a written plan approved by the Board of Directors.

51 Attachment F

 No outdoor live music for any private event  Indoor live music or any amplified sound, above quiet background music, may be approved by the Board of Directors for a WYC Club Event up to 10:00 pm with all patio doors kept closed during the music. Such approval requires a written plan approved by the WYC Board of Directors.  All members must tie off their halyards before leaving their boat in order to eliminate all halyard noise in any wind condition.

Public Use Policies:  There must be a Full Member willing to take responsibility to supervise the entire event from beginning to end to ensure all club rules are followed. (noise, clean up, securing the clubhouse, etc.).  No live bands are allowed without WYC Board approval.  Assured clean up arrangements need to be made ahead of time.  The clubhouse must be properly secured after the public use.  The club manager may require Board review of an event request.  Only one registered event is permitted at a time; the event cannot conflict with a regularly scheduled WYC event or another previously registered event.” In addition, there are rules on the use of the facilities including limiting the number of people to 75.

Parking polices: “Club parking on race days is limited; therefore members are required to ob- serve the following rules:  Vehicles parked in the parking lots must display current WYC parking stickers or be registered in the clubhouse guest registration book.  The west parking lot is reserved for full and skipper members.  The near end of the east parking lot is for full, skipper and crew members.  The far end of the east parking lot is for full, skipper and crew members, their guests and the public.  Guest vehicles must be registered by a member in the registration book in the clubhouse.  Vehicles should be parked as closely together as possible. The maximum distance apart should be two feet.  The drive through isle is intended for drop-off and pick-up only. Parking in the isle is not permitted and is subject to being towed.  Parking in the handicap parking space is also subject to being towed with a $200 fine.  The parking area on Eastman Lane has been designated by the City of Wayzata for vehicles with trailers only. Vehicles without trailers may be ticketed and towed. Personal Property, Lifts and Trailers:  Boat lifts may not be stored along the shoreline or in the parking lots, but may remain in the water by the dock.

52 Attachment F

 No trailers with or without boats may be parked overnight in the east lot.  Trailers with or without boats may not be stored in the west lot.  On occasion, generally around "put in" and "pull out" days, overnight parking may be allowed in the west lot if permission has been obtained from the WYC manager. Crane:  Club members may purchase an annual operation card for the crane.  This card is non-transferable and may be revoked without warning if used by the card holder for boats other than their own or those in a WYC recognized partnership.  Crane operation hours are dawn to dusk.  No chemical washing is allowed.  Crane boom shall be stored pointed at the white home across the street.  A crane use orientation must be completed before any operator may use the crane.

Typical Race Schedule: The typical year begins in the early winter with a series of seminars. These seminars last through the spring and continue into early summer. The first regatta is in late April with “put in”, when most of the boats are put into the water May 1st. The Thursday night races (the most intense event) start in middle of May, as do the collegiate schedule and the Sunday races. The Thursday night races end at the end of September. The season ends in late October when most of the boats are hauled out. The typical week at Wayzata Yacht Club looks something like this:

 Monday nights are generally for “match races” when two boats compete with each other. These races generate very little vehicle traffic.

 Tuesday and Wednesday nights are generally for Laser competition, again gen- erating very little vehicle traffic.

 Thursday is race night for all of the fleets. This is the most intense event of the week when most of the vehicle traffic is generated.

 Fridays are for special events such as the ADA regatta, and the Mike Plant Jun- ior regatta.

 Saturdays are reserved for “Around Big Island”, an all fleet race and it is available for special events.

 Sunday is race day for all fleets and match races. This is the second most at- tended event of the week.

During the summer there are generally regional and even national regattas for the

53 Attachment F

one design fleets. These are usually scheduled during the week. Parking Study: Identified as an issue by both the city and neighborhood, Midwest Planning & Design, undertook a parking study to:  Determine the number of Yacht Club participants that parked on the public streets  Determine number and type of vehicles that were using the yacht club parking lots and the Bayside Center parking lot,  Determine the number of vehicles with trailers parked along Eastman Lane,  Develop alternative parking strategies that will maximize the use of the existing parking areas and reduce the use of on street parking.

Current Yacht Club Parking Polices The club has identified parking as a issue and has taken several steps to correct the problem including .  Acquisition of the east parking lot in response to a growing issue about congested parking conditions on Eastman Lane. WYC proposed to use east parking area (Bell’s property) as a parking lot primarily to provide overflow parking on summer weekends when parking along Eastman Lane was congested. Nearby homeown- ers expressed concern with parking and as a result the number of parking spaces was limited to 69 parking spaces.  Parking and access was an important issue when the city granted a conditional use permit for the sailing center. The parking for the center was limited to on site land and to the yacht club’s west parking lot despite the presents of the public street.  In the last few years the club has made a concerned effort to limit parking on public streets in the near by residential neighborhood. This effort to limit parking was by general information to the members and also by temporary signs placed on residential streets asking members to park in the club’s parking lots.  To make parking in the east parking lot and Bay Center easier for the members providing them with an alternative to parking on the residential streets, the club hires a shuttle trolley that runs between the club and the Bay Center lot and the club and the east parking lot.  To control parking the club hires 3 parking/security attendants and provides them with authority to direct and control parking in both the west and east lots.

Study Method: Between July 6 and September 3 vehicle information was gathered and analyzed for Thursday race night, selected Sundays and at one national regatta. Vehicle counts were taken as to the number, type of vehicle (compact car, midsize car, full size car, mini vans and SUV’s, trailers) and the vehicle’s location.

Study Results (see diagram on page 58): Because the most intensive parking demand day is Thursday, it was studied in more detail. The graphic on the next page 58 illustrates the parking demand for a typical Thursday race night. On a typical Thursday race night, seventy-eight percent (78%) of the 305 vehicles are parked in the yacht club parking lots, Twelve percent (12%) are at Bay Center, nine percent (9%) are parked on Eastman Lane and Lake Street and 3

54 Attachment F

vehicles are parked on neighborhood residential streets. One vehicle was parked at the sailing center.

The study found that seventy-three percent (73%)of the 305 vehicles were compact cars and midsize cars with 27% being full size cars, SUV’s small trucks and mini- vans. This debunks a myth that the sailors generally drive large vehicles to the club.

Clearly and despite the myth being perpetuated, the issue of parking on neighborhood residential streets has been resolved. Likewise, the use Eastman Lane for vehicle and trailer parking with an average of 6 trailers on Thursday and Sunday seems relatively small. Except on limited occasions, trailer parking on Eastman Lane can be attributed to users of the public boat launch.

The study also documented serious safety hazards related to the dropping off of students by parents. The organization of the drop off zone on the club property with access to the sailing center by a wood bridge, with out a clearly marked drop off zone or clear traffic flow causes driver confusion resulting in unnecessary and dan- gerous vehicle backing movements. Also, without clear designated zones, there was unnecessary mingling of students preparing boats and vehicles.

The city identified the lack of emergency access to the west lot dock area as a hazard. This situation was corrected early last season by providing a 24-foot wide emergency vehicle lane appropriately signed. Even with the addition of this emergency vehicle lane, the west lot accommodated 103 vehicles on the busiest events of the season.

The use of parking attendants with authority were observed to increase the number of vehicles that were accommodated. The attendants sent vehicles to the east lot, arranged vehicles by type and size, reduced the space needed to park multi vehicles and keep clear driving isle open while accommodating more vehicles. They steadfastly enforced club policy in both lots to accommodate more vehicles,

During the busiest events and to encourage off street parking, the “trolley” hired by the club to improve access from the east lot and the Bay Center had an average of 29 passengers and ran continuously from the Bay Center to the club and from the east parking lot to the club before the event.

Although there have not been any pedestrian accidents on Eastman Lane, observations indicate a potential problem due to the lack of pedestrian facilities such as a sidewalk or trail along Eastman Lane. A large number of pedestrians were observed walking on the side of the road from the east parking lot to the club on Thurs- day race night. Pedestrian crossings were random. There are not any controlled pedestrian crossings along this section of Eastman Lane. These unprotected pedestrian movement constitutes a potential safety hazard in that most of the pedestrian movement is at the same time as the peak PM traffic volume uses the road.

55 Attachment F

Recommendations: 1. Pedestrian safety should be improved along Eastman Lane. Interviews with neighbors and observations indicate a need to improve the relationship between pedestrian, trailer parking, public launch use and vehicles using Eastman Lane. The technical paper attached to this handbook provides one solution to some of this safety issue. 2. Student drop off accommodations need safety and “way finding” improvements. 3. Based on this study, the following table suggests parking stall dimensions and driving lane widths: Vehicle Type Percent of Total Vehicle Size Parking Stall Driving Isle Parking Spaces Dimension Width

Compact 39% 5.75ft wide by 8.0 feet by 16 feet 22 feet at 90 14.92 ft long degrees Midsize 34% 5.8 feet wide by 8.0 feet by 18 feet 22 feet at 90 15.98 feet long degrees

Full Size, Mini 27% Varies 8.5 feet by 18 feet 24 feet at 90 Vans SUV’s and degrees Small Trucks

4. Areas of the parking lots should be designated by car sizes. For example the west lot should be designated for compact and midsize cars on Thursday race night. Currently 103 vehicles are parked in west lot on Thursday race night. Us- ing the parking stall and isle standards from above table and designating it mostly for compact and midsize cars approximately 99 vehicles should be parked in this lot. The east lot has the potential of accommodating a 200 vehicles if designed with the above standards. With these changes along with parking changes at the sailing center, all of the vehicles can be accommodated in off street parking spaces on the busiest events of the season. With changes to Eastman Lane all the average number of vehicles with fishing boat trailers plus additional parking can be accommodated.

5.The current city ordinance requires 7 parking spaces for 10 boat or mooring spaces or 0.7 parking space for each boat or mooring space. The city ordinance does not define boat space or mooring space. LMCD rules require adequate parking needs to be provided for multiple dock license and for special density. The Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) in a limited study indicates that .29 parking spaces per boat berth will accommodate marina parking demand.

6. Our study suggests the greatest parking demand is on Thursday race night with 305 vehicles need to be accommodated. All of the parking demand at this event is associated with slips or buoys. Developing a parking standard based on this

56 Attachment F This graphic illustratesThis graphic the location,of andvehi- number type proper-on various cles parked of busiest events the during ties the season.

57 Attachment F

worst case scenario would accommodate all parking demand in the future. How- ever, using BSUs as a demand determination ignores the data in that the largest demand is not associated with BSUs but with slips and buoys. Slides BSUs generate much less parking demand because slides are generally used for small teaching watercraft associated with the sailing center as are unrestricted watercraft. Even during a collegiate regatta (slides and unrestricted watercraft), we observed the parking lot was not extensively used.

The sailing center and club have 183 slips and buoys combined. Of course during any one year not all of the slips harbor racing sail boats, nor do all the sail boats generate high demand traffic because they are not all raced at once. Even with these differences a standard of 1.7 parking spaces per racing sail boat or per slip and buoy will accommodated all the vehicles that will use the club during the highest demand period.

Low impact development parking: Low impact development best management practices that do not diminish the number of parking space should be a parking design standard used in the creation of a master plan. This design standard conforms to the city’s storm water management plan and the comprehensive plan’s emphasis on lake protection and reduction of phosphorous and other pollutants into the lake. It also contributes to one of the yacht club’s goals in protection and enjoyment of the lake.

The city code requires parking lots to be paved and striped. Although appropriate for year around land uses such as shopping centers and office buildings, this standard is not appropriate for seasonal uses such as the yacht club and sailing center. Other types of surfaces and vehicle designations or separations that protect the lake are appropriate. These surfaces can range from grass surface in the east parking where cars are parked twice per week for a short period of time to a variety of surfaces in the west lot and sailing center. Such surfaces as granite combined, supported grass or other pervious surfaces (see white paper), provide environmentally friendly parking lots where use is seasonally limited. Designating car spots also can be done in an environmentally friendly manner with the use of various non intrusive markers.

58 Attachment F

Wayzata Community Sailing School Folder Vision: The Wayzata Community Sailing Center is supported by local organizations to introduce and instruct children, teens and adults to safely enjoy a variety of on-water activities and events. Mission:  Provide and promote affordable high quality instruction for the safe operation of a variety of boat types, with an emphasis on sailboats and sailboat racing.  Promote and teach integrity, self-sufficiency, teamwork and leadership for all students.  Provide a facility for the youth community to practice and participate in sailing regattas.  Facilitate outreach programs to introduce sailing to inner city children working with the Plant Foundation and the YMCA.  Introduce various non-motorized boating instruction to the community  Provide a pleasant, safe and relaxed social atmosphere.

Description and Program: The Wayzata Community Sailing Center (WCSC), the Wayzata Sailing Foundation (WSF) and Wayzata Sailing School (WSS): The WSF is the Wayzata Sailing Foundation operating as a Minnesota 501-c3 non- profit charitable organization. The WSS is the Wayzata Sailing School operated by the WSF, a nationally recognized and award winning youth sailing school with some of the most highly accredited sailing instructors in the nation. WCSC is the organization providing community based operations in Wayzata.

WSF’s property, located at 456 Arlington Circle and known as the Rosekrans’ property, was acquired in 2008 for a sailing school. The property, owned by the Wayzata Sailing Foundation, provides space, docks, slips, ramps, and buildings for WCSC. The school uses a centerboard type sailboat that are easily wheeled up onto shore via the ramps for racing and teaching children, keelboats for more advanced lessons, and several “chase boats” for teaching and safety.

The current WSCS programs include: A one or two week day camp type programs for children ranging from young children 5 to 6 years old and 7 to 10 year olds in the pram Small kids program on the island sail boat day camps to the 420 sail boat camps with 11 to 16 year olds.

Youth programs using a 420 type center board sail boat that include racing, sailing and environmental studies in a variety of programs for 11 to 18 year olds.

59 Attachment F

Teaching very young child (5 & 6 year olds)

Girls in the youth program hauling out a 420 sail boat on a dolly

Younger children getting ready to launch Wayzata High School sailors racing Spring and Fall High School racing program for Wayzata and Hopkins High School involving 7th graders to seniors. Starting in April, high school training is in 420s with jib and main sail exclusively. In the fall high school sailors train in Lasers and 420s.

Spring and Fall Wayzata Community Sailing Center partners with the Recreational Sports Department of the University of Minnesota and University of St. Thomas. Both universities offer a co-curricular educational and leadership programs for the students on the sailing team. Wayzata Community Sailing Center provides boats, coaching, and funds. Students compete in regattas sponsored by the Midwest Collegiate Sailing Association and the Intercollegiate Sailing Association.

There is an adaptive program for the blind and visually impaired high school juniors and seniors from the Summer Transition Program sponsored by the State Services for the Blind, and a Courage Center Program. In addition to the high school programs, several classes have been specially designed so Scouts can earn their Sailing Merit Badge. “Cool in the City” program is operated in conjunction with Blaisedell YMCA for inner city youth.

Community adult teaching programs, although not the main focus provide sailing instruction for all ages of adults. These programs offer learning opportunities for begin- ners, intermediates and advanced sailors.

60 Attachment F

Besides, Adaptive program for the blind, WCSC works cooperatively with Courage Center on other adaptive programs including an adaptive inter- school racing program

Cool in the City and Mike Plant Kids, provides lake and sailing experiences for inter-

Safety and supervision is the first criteria for using and storing boats: The number of younger children in the programs dictates safety and boat handling organization. For example, younger sailor using the Optis and prams require maximum supervision and minimum launch and recovery operations. For this reason Optis and Lasers, are stored in racks next to the launch ramp at WYC . They are rigged by the children and carried by the children, some times with assistance, the short distance to the west parking lot launch ramp which works best for the younger children. The island is used primarily for the prams that are stored on the island. These are the very youngest children who need a lot of supervision and are well contained on the small island. There are typically 10-12 prams used with the little kids. The island is also used as overflow for the “Junior Olympics”. The summer winds make these areas safer for smaller children to dock and start out .

The youth, high school and college programs use the 420 sail boat. These boats are stored on slides or on dollies and wheeled by hand to the launch ramp. The ramp on sailing center because of topography is designed to allow easier launch and recovery of these boats.

A sea of stored 420 sail boats can be unat- tractive to non sailors, but the safe youth and children’s program operations depend on storing these boats on the sailing center property when they are not in use. To reduce the unat- tractiveness, WSF is considering several op- 420s behind screening tions for summer and winter storage including screening the boats as was done when they were on the yacht club’s property or restricting storage to certain locations on the property or both.

New Facilities: At the present time, the existing home has been updated so that it can be used as an

61 Attachment F

office and for storage, but not for class rooms. This class room defi- ciency as well as other issues are concerns being addressed. There are several disadvantages to using the existing home related to code issues for a school and the need to have enough room for indoor class rooms. WSF, which owns the property, would like to remove the existing home and build a larger sailing center. However, a final decision on a future home has not been made by the WSF Board. Tent and picnic tables are used for class rooms

Artist concept of new building on the site Source: Bruce Schmidt Architects

62 Attachment F

Interviews and Analysis Folder Summary: In 2009, 44 interviews were conducted with yacht club and sailing center board members, public officials and neighbors. The goal of the interviews was to develop a contextual understanding of the community and neighborhood within which WYC and WSCS operate, and to develop an understanding of the WYC and WSCS.

Although not viewed as separate organizations, most people, generally, think WYC and WCSC are community and neighborhood assets and do not want them to leave. They see both organizations as an important part of the community fabric providing the image that they want to project and providing an important link to the most prevalent “small town character” theme expressed by a large number of people.

The Lake is a jewel in their lives manifested in a “parental protectionist” attitude towards the lake and access to the lake. What we mean by this is that people generally feel that the lake, therefore the neighborhood, and their way of life are jeopardized by change. To protect the lake is seen as the focal point to protecting a way of life.

A number of clear ethnological themes that at times are in conflict, held in common by both the neighbors and by the public officials, emerged from the interviews:  Maintaining small lake town character;  Slowing change (growth);  Holding on to the nostalgic town (a sense of history);  Maintaining a domicile (the quiet neighborhood);  Wanting diversity (mixed land uses) and rejecting of the typical automobile suburb.  “Rus in urbe” or retaining the urban convenience while living in the country  Manifestation of capitalism expressed in property rights, individualism and property as an investment commodity without rough edges introduced by mixed land uses.

The interviews and document search reveals a long history of conflict between these ethnological themes. For example, the vitality of urban character embodied by the limited number of Thursday night race events intruding on quiet country living. The un- manicured look and interference with views is interpreted as a threat to property as an investment commodity and to domicile. Although manifested in the relations with WYC and WCSC, the conflict is also of a community character with property as an investment commodity in conflict with diversity, a trait of small town character.

The record search when coupled with the interviews also reveals public officials who profoundly understand the value of small town character, mixed uses and diversity. These officials work hard to grapple with the fine grain relationships necessary to accomplish the desired end. However, the record indicates inapproperately introduced conflict between the competing ethnological themes, the city and the organizations, and property owners. At the same time, we saw and heard from passionate sailors, an ingredient necessary to make the organizations viable, not understanding yet wrestling 63 Attachment F

with the community’s ethnos, without knowing how to fit into and support the culture as part of the community fabric.

This community stage is an immensely complicated place involving a large company of meaningful and civil people who we observed as frustrated. This frustration, mostly hidden, from time to time has an opportunity to emerge as unilateral actions, the per- petuation of unfavorable myths that were at one time based in reality but no longer true, and a great deal of distrust and fear.

Interviews: Forty-four people were interviewed. Those interviewed included representative sample of neighbors; all Planning Commissioners and all City Council members; local agency, City staff and State officials who could provide relevant information The confidential individual interviews were scheduled by Midwest Planning & Design, LLC (MPD) and conducted by MPD’s Principle during July and August 2009. The interview questions were developed by MPD with the purpose of: 1) understanding the context of the area in which a master plan is developed, 2) understanding the attitudes toward WYC and WCSC, 3) understanding the history within the context of the area; 4) identifying the positive and the negative concerns about WYC and WCSC.

Perception of WYC and WCSC: How people perceive a land use becomes important to the planning process because it sets the agenda for support or opposition to the land use. With the goal of understanding perception, we asked all the interviewees if they thought WYC was an asset to the community. We also asked the same people if they thought WCSC was an asset to the community. To develop our understanding, we asked them to elaborate on their answer.

Positive perception, public officials: Wayzata Yacht Club: Public officials interviewed enthusiastically indicated that both WYC and WCSC are assets to the community and are an important part of the community structure. They see WYC as a long-standing historical “classy” factor in the community that provides community recreational access to the lake without cost to the City. WYC provides a positive, “port type, nautical community image” on an important “gateway” (Eastman Lane) to the downtown (City). Sailing is perceived as: a clean, wholesome sport; adding colorful beauty to the lake; enhancing the neighborhood and community; helping to create the “Wayzata brand” ; making the area look better, providing neighborhood and community diversity (a small town characteristic), and adding value to the area. One person articulated WYC as an asset that fits into the general theme of why people like Wayzata when she said: “It is a family oriented extension of our small town character that adds to the quality of life, aesthetically fits into the community fabric and the image of a small town on the lake.”

Others thought that WYC brings family oriented people to the business community. Officials perceived WYC as a good, although at times troublesome and exasperating,

64 Attachment F

citizen and a good neighbor with “passionate members who love sailing.” The wish is that they become “allied with the neighborhood.”

Wayzata Community Sailing School: Public officials interviewed see WCSC as a community asset. When asked to elaborate, they indicated it is an asset because: it attracts kids; teaches kids respect for the lake, safety, confidence-building skills. They think of it as a high quality school that opens up opportunities for youth, inner city kids, and the handicapped. One person appreciated that it was not an “elitist organization.” Another sees the school as a “village asset” and would like to see WCSC offer more classes and be proactively col- laborating with local organizations such as the business community, churches, and In- terfaith Outreach. Others thought WCSC provides good family recreation and adds to the community’s family orientation; “it fits with the Wayzata family image.”

Others thought WCSC will evolve to a good use of the land and that its location is appropriate adjacent safe waters and WYC. Some felt that it was “putting Wayzata on the map enhancing its reputation and helping the retail stores by bringing more people to the community.

Positive perception, neighbors: Wayzata Yacht Club: With the exception of three neighbors, (21 were interviewed) neighbors also see WYC and WCSC as neighborhood and community assets. Those neighbors seeing WYC as an asset like the land use because it allows lake views which another land use may interrupt; see it as a small town “charmer” with sailing adding beauty to the lake. For several people, sailing provides neighborhood entertainment indicating that they love to watch the sailboats “especially on Thursday night when they come back in mass from the lower lake with their colorful sail open.” There was expression by some that they like the sights and sounds of sailing. One person liked the “wind chime” like noises. However, most people objected to the use of the PA system at the club and on the lake. Others felt it offered a unique service, fit the concept of an “affluent community,” and was making Wayzata nationally recognizable. Some indicated that WYC was improving as a “neighbor that listens, at least recently, to their concerns.” All of the neighbors indicated that there were issues that need to be resolved and expressed a heightened concern with WYC growth.

Those neighbors that did not see WYC as an asset expressed: Highly sensitive fears that it would grow too large; thought it needed to beautify its grounds; didn’t increase the economic value of the neighborhood or their property and interfered with lake views. Another felt that it creates too much traffic, and served more than Wayzata families, making a claim that the non-residents were those who are creating the prob- lems. There is a general perception with these neighbors that the club has been arro- gant and needs to work positively with the neighborhood rather than growing uncon- trollably and acting like it is not part of the neighborhood. “ I want it to be a good neighbor”, said one interviewee. Only one neighbor indicated that they would like to see WYC move.

65 Attachment F

Wayzata Community Sailing Center: With few exceptions, the neighbors are also generally positive about WCSC. Some neighbors loved to hear the laughter of children, appreciated youth education and saw the school as an educational opportunity not only for sailing, but for environmental education related to the lake. Another saw it as an appropriate buffering land use between WYC and the single-family neighborhood and yet another saw it as a good diversity in the neighborhood. One person did not have an issue with the land use, programs or operations, but did express major concerns with site housekeeping. The only person who did not see it as an asset saw WCSC as an unnecessary expansion of WYC.

How can WYC and WCSC be better neighbors? We also asked how WYC and WCSC could be better neighbors. Like the asset ques- tion, we tried to separate WYC and WCSC questions and the uses. This was not al- ways possible. The next part of this report deals with how the organizations could be better neighbors.

Like many public officials, the Wayzata officials do not like controversy. A general expression of frustration is almost universal with these officials. They are, in some cases, imploring WCSC and WYC to work with the neighborhood and the City to resolve the issues of parking, access and keeping a buffer area between the school and the neighborhood. A number of public officials decried what they perceive as arrogance, and the lack of respect for public safety, the City, and its ordinances. One expressed his frustration when he said, ”both the Club and the School need to walk in the neighbor’s shoes to see the affects of their actions and proposals, and then to ask themselves, if I were this neighbor how would I truthfully react to the proposal.” “There is too much of “we and they” attitude demonstrated by the school and club.”

WYC Myths: We obtained many ideas from public officials and neighbors that WYC and WCSC can use to improve the perception of a “good neighbor”. We also noticed that both organizations are seen for past mistakes or old animosities rather in the “here and now”. Perpetuating myths that grew from past perceptions and behaviors seems to be the focal point of some neighbors and a few public officials. For example, there’s a perception that WYC has made major strides in its public image, but a very few of the public officials, and a significant number of neighbors harbor old animosities; distrust runs high. Although occurring in the past and not a present reality, inappropriate club member behaviors, a long-standing issue, still plagues WYC. Today small instances are sometimes magnified beyond their seriousness because of instances that may have occurred up to five, ten or even twenty years ago and now are part of the “WYC myth”. A few public officials referred to WYC members as “big kids” or “kids” or “need to have members conduct themselves as adults.” Thursday night was referred to as “big kid night”.

For Example, parking in the neighborhood has been generally curtailed, but public officials and neighbors still tell of inappropriate behavior when club member parking was common in the neighborhood. Past arrogances are magnified and brought forward

66 Attachment F

without recent facts to indicated that the behaviors have changed. These and other examples are part of what we call the “WYC myth.” Out of frustration club members also tell stories of past conflicts in which they felt betrayed. Rather than dealing with the “here and now”, they also have a sence of that the neighborhood and the city have acted inappropriately.

Establishing Mutual Trust: There is a lack of trust by the yacht club of the public officials and of the neighbors. This mistrust seems to come from a long history of conflict, which is perceived by the yacht club as micro management and attempts to curtail existing property rights. It is manifested in such statements as, “when we try to work with the city we can not get clear direction, there seems to be a disconnect between the council and the staff; we are treated unfairly by stringing us along and then changing things after we have made an agreement.” The myths perpetuated by some of the neighbors, especially the residential street parking myths, animosities from up to 20 years ago and the spreading of incorrect information also contribute to the yacht club’s mistrust.

A major underlying fear expressed in some fashion by most of the neighbors and many of the public officials involves the fear that WYC and WCSC will “continue to grow un- controllably.” This fear was expressed out right and in a number of statements: “a three pound use in a two pound bag”, “stop pushing the envelope”, “limit the membership and growth”, “I am absolutely afraid that you will continue to grow and ruin our neighborhood” or WYC will become a motorboat marina. Like most fears, this growth fear has past roots, but like most fears is also somewhat, but not totally, irrational.

Establishing trust and maintaining it constitutes a hard on going job. An essential ele- ment in trust is mutually benefiting reciprocity, a job seen as an essential undertaking for the city, neighborhood, yacht club and sailing center that will reduce (not eliminate) the historical tension that exists between the organizations and the neighborhood.

Another common theme running through the “how can we be better neighbors” ques- tion and related to growth fears expressed itself in the perception that WYC and WCSC does not have a plan, does not coordinate its planning, cannot stick to an overall vision, and does not care about the vitality of the neighborhood. One official expressed it like this: “make your neighbors allies.” Another sincerely, and we think profoundly, stated: “this neighborhood needs to be protected if it is going to continue to be viable and maintain its character” (italics added). Looking for opportunities where the club’s actions can improve the neighborhood constitutes a new way of thinking.

Neighbor’s and Public Officials perception of their community and neighborhood: The yacht club has been part of this neighborhood for over 40 years. The neighbors interviewed have lived in neighborhood an average of 17 years. These neighbors moved to this area for a variety of reasons including: good place for kids; schools; qui- etness; their particular home; proximity to downtown Wayzata, proximity to a church, to downtown Minneapolis, to the bus, other parts of the metro area or to work. Lake access, fishing, and lake views with south facing lots were important location considera-

67 Attachment F

tions. Many treasure the lakeshore and Wayzata Bay’s safety. Some neighborhoods talked about the natural wooded setting extensively. Some followed spouses; others grew up in the community or took advantage of an opportunity. Although a limited number have sailed, most are power boaters, over half of the neighbors boat on the lake. However, many avoid the lake on the weekends because of the “power boat chaos in Wayzata Bay”.

With these answers and when asked what they valued most about living in Wayzata, we can start to see the community and neighborhood characteristics that are ethno- logically important. Culturally important characteristics need understanding to avoid or at least diminish controversial polarization brought about by change.

Small Town Character: The most prevalent characteristic communicated to us was the concept of “small town character.” Asked to elaborate on the meaning of “small town character,” the neighbors articulated several examples: similar to the “Cheers” phenomenon, “where everyone knows your name” or “where people stop to talk when we are sitting on our front porch.” Others liked the strong inclusive community organizations; the urban form: small streets and small buildings; unique recognizable neighborhoods, with “every neighborhood different,” and unique housing, “not like most tract suburbs.“ A large number of people liked the area because it is a ”walkable” community close to restaurants, grocery store, and shopping. Others articulated “small town character” as land use and social diversity and a community with a heart (downtown). Small quaint place, and solitude were used a number of times to describe the character. One neighbor articulated it when she said: “Being around the lake is like being on a perpet- ual vacation.” Even the presence of an active railroad added to the unique “small town character” in some neighbor’s minds.

When asked: “what are the special, unique, sensitive, or important features that exist in this area.” Neighbors responded with examples such as: the lake; access to the lake; wetlands; bird life; open space; open views of the lake; their neighbors; quiet neighborhood; walkable access, and open and green Arlington Circle. One neighbor thought it was a unique place because it is a “compromise between the city and the country.” This last statement is one of the most important ethnological concepts in suburban growth that needs to be understood when fitting into a mixed use small town suburban community.

The pubic officials interviewed have lived in Wayzata for an average of 20 years; seven (7) years being the shortest period and 55 years being the longest period. The reasons for moving to Wayzata are similar to what the neighbors gave as reasons with the exception that there is more emphasis on the quality of education, nostalgia and community. All but one of the public officials is a boater and three are or were sailors.

Like the neighbors, a large number of officials stressed small town or village character and they articulated the meaning of small town character in similar ways as the neighbors articulated the character. For example, one person said his goal was to:

68 Attachment F

“maintain Wayzata as the old time vacation village not as a suburb.” Another person stated: “There is constant babble about small town character, but big houses, big of- fices, and big commercial will kill the small town that we have”.

Public officials gave other examples of “small town character” including: old growth trees, water quality; parks trails; little shops; rural character; closeness to the country; safe roads; unique neighborhoods and “a south facing sun bathed community” meaning don’t interfere with views. It’s a slow pace area relaxing with a high quality of life that provides a relief from the city. (Obviously a commuter and another example of suburban ethnology). Other reasons for valuing this area are: the beauty of the place, its architecture, its parks, variety of land uses and the safety of small town living. One person articulated the small town when he said: “we need good passionate development by people philosophically willing to keep Wayzata attractive as a place to live, work and play”. The automobile suburban image, Plymouth for example, is repugnant to many people.

Perception of Lake Minnetonka: Of course, both public officials and neighbors described Lake Minnetonka as the “great natural resource even in a State of natural resources” or the community’s life style character. We asked several questions designed to coax interviewees to articulate what they think about the lake and to describe what threats they see to the lake. This jewel at their doorstep is a primary reason that many people chose Wayzata and continue to live in the community. There is a deep, emotional, protectionist attitude about the lake and about public access to the lake. This attitude can be characterized as “protectionist parental.” That is, a perception that it’s their responsibility to protect the lake like a parent would protect a child. Others characterized the lake as: a community asset owned by all the citizens; provides refreshing breezes; calming; peaceful; a beautiful and wonderful amenity; love it; scenic and natural; great fishing; great for winter walks, and “we love to walk to the beach, to the end of Arlington and skip stones; sunsets on the docks; feeding fish”.

A large number of interviewees felt that the lake and thus their way of life were in some jeopardy. The most prevalent themes when asked to articulate the reason for this feel- ing were: over development, pollution and invasive species threaten the quality of the lake and as such their enjoyment. They also listed other threats such as: shoreline deterioration; pollution including mercury that impairs the lake, phosphorous from storm water runoff; pollution from parking lots, impervious surface and yards; diminished wet lands and tree cover; abusive motor boat traffic; property maintenance; use of chemi- cals in the lake; over use of the lake; lake levels; sailing center; new Bay Center; traffic and the elimination of green space.

Ethnological Identity: As expected, clear ethnological identity exists between the neighbors and the public officials. Any planning and development needs to understand that identity and fit in to the “small town character” while acting as a “parental protector” of the lake.

69 Attachment F

This small town concept fits with some of the cultural themes identified by public officials and neighbors resulted in ideas of how WYC and WCSC fit into this culture. A few neighbors and some public official emphasized the need to rehabilitate rather than remove the Rosekrans House; part of the desire to retain history and lake related architecture. Another public official stressed the need to develop a coordinated plan for WYC, WCSC, and city improvements to a New England style motif including buildings, landscaping, streets, sidewalks and paths, fencing, parking, docks, slips, lighting, etc. We would suggest a traditional nautical theme rather than any type of modern architectural style would also capture the “small town character.” One person mentioned keeping things at a human scale (code word for small) and limiting heights. Extending the walkability on Eastman Lane was a common suggestion. More lake related recreation use to bring people closer to the lake was also suggested by more than one person.

How to manage change while maintaining “small town character” is a dilemma facing a number of public officials. The dilemma occurs in the realization that change is occurring in both the community and neighborhood, wanting the community to improve and not knowing how or having the will to maintain the communities character within the parameters of maintaining character.

WYC and WCSC are community assets as long as they are quiet, beautiful places, adding beauty to the lake and the view, educating kids and improving the community image. However, on Thursday night for 17 weeks out of 52 weeks, it fills with people and changes the character of the area to a busy, vibrant, bustling, car invested place; very urban. We believe this change experienced in this limited fashion grinds against the basic reason public officials and neighbors chose Wayzata over an urban life style and that it, at some level, threatens them to the point that they feel they need to contain it.

Small town character” and the lake are rally points rooted in basic ethnological themes:  Small Town Character,  Nostalgia (sense of history) in conflict with change,  Rejection of the automobile suburb,  “Paternalism” as it pertains to the lake. Planning strategies immersed in these themes and wrapped in managed change while maintaining the community’s character, will go a long way to assuring a reasonable use of WYC and WCSC land that will actually enhance the neighborhood or be perceived to enhance the neighborhood.

Specific possible development examples are:  Eliminating all on street parking while appropriately screening parking and storage areas;  Develop a coordinated theme so that all improvements have a small town nautical theme or themes identified by the context of the neighborhood;  Protect views as improvements are made to the property;  Developing Arlington Circle as a greenway with limited vehicle public access and emergency vehicle access while strengthening its buffer function;

70 Attachment F

 Coordinate improvements with Eastman Lane improvements and insist that the County and City create a “nautical gateway” to the community that improves walkability;  Improve Central Ave public access embracing it into the nautical design and mini- mize its negative effects on the lake and the club;  More effectively use the navigable channel between WYC and WCSC for keel boat moorage;  Develop a neighborhood membership with club and sailing center privileges that could include: use of the facilities, boat launching, crane use, small boat storage such as a small craft rack, environmental and boat training, etc;  Use “best management practice” to clean surface water runoff before it is released to the lake;

Issues and Concerns: Concerns are issues that neighbors and public officials find offensive or, in our terms, toxic to community character. The following issues identified at the interviews have been categorized by subjects: Issues and Concerns General Growth: The concern that we heard most often is based on the fear of “uncontrolled growth”. This manifestation it revealed in representative statements such as: “Shady Lane would become more isolated by commercial and sailing uses”; “that the buoy field will be moved or expanded interfering with lake use and views”; “WYC is “shoehorning into a space that it was never intended to contain such a use”, and “stop proliferation”.

This concern is addressed by creating predictability. That is, creating a zoning tool that is flexible enough to allow the club and sailing center the opportunity to run their operations within their vision, but within a plan that creates predictability. Either a form based code or performance code approach rather then incremental conditional use permits will allow this to occur.

Traffic: Traffic congestion, safety and nuisance due to the public boat launch including lining up to obtain access, bicycle and pedestrian safely due to trailer parking; traffic congestion and safety at the intersection of Eastman Lane and Arlington Circle; pedestrian access and safety along Eastman Lane; traffic cutting through Old Holdridge Neighborhood; wide streets; safe access in the yacht club’s east parking lot; need to reduce Eastman Lane speeds, and the need for dedication of additional Eastman Lane right-of- way.

At the back of this hand book is a cross section suggested by Midwest Plan- ning and Design that will separate and protect pedestrians and bicycles, reduce speeds (25 MPH) and provide on street parking as a pedestrian asset rather than a safety concern.

Parking: Parking on Arlington Circle including winter parking, parking in the

71 Attachment F

neighborhood (greatly improved) parking and public safety in the west parking lot (lot 4); expanding the east parking lot; un-slightly parking at WCSC; winter use of Arlington Circle including: loading and unloading Snowmobile and ATV trailers and fish houses ; WYC crew members do not care where they park; not sufficient off street parking especially for events; parking seems to be a 100% plus; sail boat trailer parking during very are regattas.

Having demonstrated that the club and sailing center have sufficient room on their land to contain all its parking on site using acceptable parking standards, the design objective will be to create parking areas that are both aesthetically and environmentally sound for this seasonal use. Like wise, a re- design of Arlington Circle that creates a summer environmental buffer and allows limited and responsible winter use as well as emergency vehicle access can be accomplished. Studies and existing examples have demonstrated that abuses can be controlled by design. For example, the design and placement of the new sailing center, creating an environmental greenway with access that limits abusive behavior.

Noise: Starting gun and horn on Wayzata Bay all day long; train; speed boats; abusive noisy parties; audio speaker at times; limit traffic noise especially on Arlington Circle; noise beyond 10:00PM; loud music; boom boxes; PA system; noise from halyards; need last call curfew earlier than 10:00 PM; bands.

Although the club has changed its operating policy to reduce noise and other nuisances, these policies can be strengthen. Likewise, responsible use of the club house for community space will change the image from a “party place” to a Wayzata community space thus encouraging activities that reflect the character of the residential area. Neighborhood memberships, discussed earlier, that encourage its use by the neighborhood will also change the image.

Crime: Minor vandalism; sail boat people deter crime and at times seem to add to crime. Police records do not indicate any unusual amount of crime in this neighborhood. In addition, the club has security.

Nuisance: Trash from motor boaters; junk; water clarity during the dredging in the 1980s; trash, broken bottles, liter, alcohol use, 4 wheeler and snowmobile noise and trespassing onto yards near Arlington Circle during the winter; smells of gas from the public ramp; spot lights; upward lighting; dust from parking lot and tracking gravel onto Eastman Lane from the parking lots causing safety issues for bikers; housekeeping especially at WCSC;

As discussed earlier, many of these nuisances can be, as addressed by design. However, educational and regulatory changes are also necessary. These can include such regulations as: power on restrictions at the public landing, signs and fines for litter and trespass, and speed limits for off road

72 Attachment F

vehicles.

Water Quality: nitrogen, phosphorous; herbicides; zebra mussel; hardscape (impervious surface); boat cleaning; surface storm water runoff reduce water quality.

Using Best Management Practices (BMP) in the use and design of the facilities, including the public boat launch and Eastman Lane will reduce the pollution contributed by this area to the lake.

Invasive species: Garlic Mustard; Buckthorn; Milfoil; Lose Leaf; Flowering Rush; Zebra Mussel;

There is a need to control lake access to control Aquatic Invasive Species such as: better and more thorough inspection, better trained inspectors; continued regatta inspections. The public launch is a city operation and the city should empower inspects and assure their training as part of the responsibility of having a municipal ramp.

Marina Operations: non-teaching motor boats; boat rental (research confirmed that there are not any boat rentals except in conjunction with the university sailing program); WCSC winter boat storage in the lake and front yard setbacks; non-standards for small boats on land (LMCD has standards); in- creasing the number of slips; week end boat usage needs to be managed; floating dock; density of boats is pushing the envelope; over use; number of regattas; reducing the boat density near the residential part of the neighborhood moving some of the slips to the east, being careful where boats are parked.

Operational policies and design can address most of these issues.

View obstruction: vegetation blocking views; possible future building heights or location; view of the crane;

Other concerns: WCSC looks like a mess; deterioration of the fisheries by herbicides (not WYC issue ); tree protection; WCSC does not seem to understand that there are rules; need to strengthen public use with the LMCD to maintain boat density; the way the neighborhood is treated by WYC; need to protect the trees; location of the new Metropolitan Council’s sanitary sewer 24 inch duplicate force main to be installed north of Eastman Lane.

Rosekran’s House: During the interview period a news article appeared in the local paper indicating that the existing home would be demolished and a new building would be built for the sailing school. There were several public officials that expressed disappointed that the existing home was proposed to be torn down. They felt keeping a sense of history

73 Attachment F

should be part of the education program. Substantial disbelief was expressed when it was explained to them the keeping the home was cost prohibitive, even to the point of suggesting a renovating contractor that could do the job at reasonable cost. Other officials did not believe that the existing home could not be renovated for the same price as tearing it down.

Concern and Issue Analysis: Sailing improves the value of the residential property as long as the use, like other mixed-uses, is designed and used in a fine-grained manner. For example, creating a WYC and WCSC design and operations that allow the uses to interact, not just to exist, with the other uses without having a negative impact on each other. Likewise, this ap- plies to the other uses in the mixed-use area; meaning that the impacts of single-family homes may have on WYC. We think that one reason WYC and WCSC conditional use permits are not turned down is that the City intuitively understands mixed-use characteristic, but they clearly do not know how to regulate it without inviting conflict.

Some public officials and a number neighbors use the rhetoric of “small town character” without understanding that when land uses are mixed as is typical in small towns, non-toxic conflicts will exist. To maintain small town character, business as usual is not going to work, that is, standard zoning and conditional use permits are not an effective means to regulate mixed-use neighborhoods. There are at least two mixed use zoning methods that will work more affectively then the current jumbo of what is known as Euclidian zoning.

The large dissatisfaction, illustrated by the number of issues, with the WYC and WCSC, although not as distasteful as some projects that we have worked on, makes us think, especially in light of the fact that they think WYC and WCSC are assets, that the concerns are systemic of a bigger issue not solvable by WYC or WCSC alone. Al- though a number of issues described by public officials and neighbors are under- standably irritating, we think the underlying issue revolves around what we describe as ethno-conflict.

There are a number of ethnological themes that, at times, are in conflict with each other, yet held in common by both the neighbors and by the public officials. These are:

1) Maintaining “small lake town character”, which was not only positively characterized with such statements as wanting diversity (mixed land uses) and rejection of the automobile suburb, walkability, sense of history, maintaining a domicile (the quite neighborhood), but what could be considered negatively characterized by statements like: slowing change (growth), nostalgic absolutism. This observation leads us to the next theme.

2) “Rus in urbe” or retaining the urban convenience while living in the country. This is largely an American theme expressed repeatedly and embodying the foundation of the “American Dream,” an expression of a threatened selfhood and pursuit of the utopian mix of country and the city. It is so deeply ingrained in the suburban culture that any

74 Attachment F

disruption of it, a disruption common even in a real small town, let alone in an active, vibrant metropolitan area, will induce heightened conflict, frustration, and polarization.

3) The suburb and suburban property is seen as a manifestation of capitalism expressed in property rights and individualism. Property, quality of the neighborhood and community are together seen as an investment commodity. When rough edges associated with mixed-use are introduced, a threat to this commodity is assumed and a re- action pursues which manifests itself in wanting to eliminate the threat, and finding fault (large number of issues and concerns). Except for the elimination, this was evident from the interviews but not as evident from the document search. To better illustrate the theme: the arrangement, care and marketing of planned communities related to property as a commodity is exemplified by such places as Hilton Head, Bearpath, and the manicured, gated communities found especially in California and the south.

The interviews and document search reveals a long history of conflict between these ethnological themes. For example, the vitality in urban character embodied by the limited number of Thursday night race events (17 Thursdays out of 52 Thursdays in the year) intruding on vision of rus in urbs (quiet country living). The un-manicured look, interfaced views, etc. seen as a threat to the investment commodity (property as an investment commodity in conflict with diversity common in small towns). The threat brought about by the possible elimination of “borrowed views” relates to investment commodity but also represents a threat to selfhood and individualism. That is, although the views are making the investment commodity worth more without any capital cost, they also differentiate individual property and thus differentiate individual selfhood (my property is better than yours) by retaining the views. If the views are lost, the selfhood associated with differentiated property is diminished.

Point being: the issues we heard are a manifestation of much deeper ingrained ethnos and that solving them may placate neighbors and public officials for a while, but because they are not the underlying issue other faults will be found or myths perpetuated. Developing a master plan that builds on the neighborhood culture may not curtail issues but it certainly will dramatically reduce them.

The sailing center and club are not innocent and their attitudes and their behaviors can re-enforce the conflicts. However, as the interviews and records search reveal WYC and WCSC are also victims of myths, old animosities, unreasonable conditions, unilateral agreements, and restrictive rules that limit their ability to resolve issues. Proc- esses and negotiated legitimate understandings need to be developed with the city and neighborhood rather than unilateral actions by either the city or the organizations.

This is not to suggest that some concerns are not within the power of WYC and WCSC to resolve. These issues need to be addressed, but parking issues, Arlington Circle, storm water are not solvable by the organizations alone and traffic issues associated with Eastman Lane and the public boat launch should not be solved on the back of the organizations.

75 Attachment F

Analysis Conclusion: From the information, we believe that the time is right to realign the entitlements in a way that provides predictability for all parties, makes WYC and WCSC less vulnerable and more likely to accomplish its vision and reduces the conflict. We also think the time is right to move forward as an ally with the neighborhood, by combating old myths, developing trust, and outreaching.

In moving forward WYC and WCSC needs to continue to take a programmed task oriented responsibility to resolve issues that are within their power. Through the master planning process, it must insist that the city come to the table to resolve issues that are their responsibility. If Wayzata is like other Cities, it will try, as it did in 1976, to put the burden on WYC. Within reason, WYC and WCSC needs to stand fast to insist that the solutions to the issues and to making this neighborhood a part of the fabric of small town character need to be proactively developed and paid for by all parties not just WYC and WCSC.

Suggested Planning Strategies: The strategies suggested below along with the those suggested in the various analysis sections are being provided in this draft report to stimulate discussion, which we hope will lead to other ideas and strategies.  Use the charrette process to develop a detailed, transparent, collaborative, physical master plan with the City, Neighborhood, LMCD, MCWD and DNR that is context sensitive with the neighborhood, solves many of the current issues and incorporates the WYC and WCSC long term vision including the ultimate program size of WYC and WCSC. The plan should encompass both WYC and WCSC property, public launch, Eastman Lane, Arlington Circle and the marina. The plan should include details such as access, parking, storm water management, preservation of green space, future building locations and height, view protection, general but not specific landscaping, and the marina.

 Such a plan should be detailed and should set boundaries. For example, a clear non overlapping understanding as to jurisdiction, an understanding that lake levels change and the survival of WYC depends on a reasonable amount of flexibility to adopt to those change.

 Ally with the neighborhood and work with the City to legitimize the agreed upon master plan as a separate zoning district with detailed entitlements

 Develop a general timetable to implement the plan with private and public budgets and funding sources and with a City/County commitment to fund cost related to Arlington Circle, the public launch and improvements to East- man Lane. The county’s current reluctance to improve Eastman lane to Lake Street should not be acceptable.

 Develop a general operational plan that implements the physical develop-

76 Attachment F

ment master plan and sets standard of marina and property operations without giving up vested rights that are needed for the success of the yacht club and sailing center.

 Review, and if necessary, set and enforce standards related to member behavior that dignifies WYC. Although we do not think it is necessary, many private clubs ask members to agree in writing to the clubs standards of behavior.

 Because we cannot see into the future and we do not want to continue to invite conflict and distrust, develop an interactive policy that can be approved by the City as to how the physical plan will be amended from time to time to account for unpredictable situations.

Sources and Notes: Entitlements are property rights inherent in the ownership of land and the exercise of those rights by a grant of authority from the peoples representatives in this case the City Council and the LMCD Confidential Interviews conducted in July and August 2009 Confidential Interviews conducted in July and August 2009 Having views or open space that a property owner does not own, or contribute a capital or operating expense to is, in planning terms, considered a “barrowed view or barrowed space”. E.g., parks, wetlands and non-riparian views. Plan making requires the “barrowed space” concept to be understood as does the concept of “property rights” because they will be in conflict with each other and provide a political pivot around which to rally support or opposition. 2009 Comprehensive Plan Page 1-7 2009 Comprehensive Plan Page 3-3 2009 Comprehensive Plan Map 5.1 SRF Report to the City of Wayzata, December 13, 2005, Page 8 Table 1 2009 Comprehensive Plan Map 5.6, 5.7, 5.8 http://www.ite.org/emodules/scriptcontent/Orders/index.cfm Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act City Zoning Code http://webapps5.dnr.state.mn.us/cgi-bin/lk_levels_dump.pl?format=csv&id=27013300 http://www.minnehahacreek.org/ Wayzata: Natural Resource Inventory and Minnesota Land Cover Classification System Mapping, March 2006, Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services, prepared by Bonestroo Resources with funding from the DNR A scoping study is a cursory review of the available information and a site visit to determine if a more detail study is necessary. There are a number of firms in the twin cities that do this type of work Wayzata Bay Center Redevelopment Origin and Destination Study, Howard R. Green Company 2007 July interview with the owner Wayzata Historical Society Telegraph 46th edition Jan/Feb/Mar, 2009 page 4 Wayzata Historical Society Telegraph 47th edition April May June 2009 page 3 Gordon Gunlock interview The rue in urbe is an ethnological phenomenon that dives suburban growth. Simply put, it is the desire by a majority of North Americans to have the social and economic benefits of the city while enjoying the benefits of rural living. These non-parallel desires often lead to conflict. Wayzata is primary example of this phenomenon in action, which may account for the polarized governance related to development. Source Dr. John Archer, County Property records; Gronberg Survey June 21 letter from Phil Cole to City Attorney Robert Meller Confidential neighbor interview conducted August 4, 2009

77 Attachment F

1974 Areal Photo, Gromberg and Coffman Survey, June 21 letter from Phil Cole to City Attorney Robert Meller City Council Minutes January 15, 1974 City Council Minutes February 5, 1974 City Council Minutes January 18 1979 Amendment to the 1976 Agreement Dated February 5, 1980 June 21 letter from Phil Cole to City Attorney Robert Meller January 6, 1976 City Council Minutes June 21 letter from Phil Cole to City Attorney Robert Meller April 30, 1976 Agreement between the City and WYC April 30, 1976 Agreement between the City and WYC May 3, 1982 Amendment to 1976 Agreement July 10, 1990 City Council Minutes Deed of Trust; letter to Stephen Levitus from Bradley Fuller dated Sept 13, 1985 letter to Stephen Levitus from Bradley Fuller dated Sept 13, 1985 Wayzata Historical Society Telegraph 46th edition Jan/Feb/Mar, 2009 page 4 Minnesota Historical Society, Although the plan which was obtained by Gordon Gunlock from the MHS was most likely used to obtain a permit a search at MHS did not produce the drawing contained in this report of a copy of the permit. 1912 Map of proposed channel, Minnesota Historical Society Interview with Gordon Gunlock, Wise relative who lived in the area in the 1930’s Wayzata Historical Society Telegraph 46th edition Jan/Feb/Mar, 2009 page 4 Wayzata Historical Society Telegraph 46th edition Jan/Feb/Mar, 2009 page 4 Interview with Gordon Gunlock, Wise relative who lived in the area in the 1930’s City Planning Commission Minutes March 15, 1982 Memo from David Licht and Scott Richards (City’s Planning Consultants) to Tom Young, June 30, 1997 In the same memo Licht indicates that a marina is not allowed in the R-2 Single family district as a conditional use permit; Interview and correspondence between the City and WYC. Conditional use permit language from the City Ordi- nance States:”801.01.5: CONDITIONAL USES: Any established use or building legally existing prior to the establishment of this Ordinance and which now classified as a conditional use may be continued in like fashion and activity and shall automatically be considered as having received conditional use permit approval. Any change to such a use, or any other subsequently approved conditional use, shall however, require a new conditional use permit be processed according to this Ordinance.(page1-2). “ July and August Interviews Interview conducted August 5, 2009, Historical and Architectural Resources of Wayzata, Minnesota prepared for the Heritage Preservation Board Wayzata Historical Society, July 2003 Historical and Architectural Resources of Wayzata, Minnesota prepared for the Heritage Preservation Board Way- zata Historical Society, July 2003 Interview with Gordon Gunlock Historical and Architectural Resources of Wayzata, Minnesota prepared for the Heritage Preservation Board Way- zata Historical Society, July 2003 Interview with Gordon Gunlock; purchase agreement. Historical and Architectural Resources of Wayzata, Minnesota prepared for the Heritage Preservation Board Way- zata Historical Society, July 2003 Wayzata City Council Resolution number 17-2008, City Council Minutes "Boat Storage Units" means a space or facility available for mooring, docking or storing a watercraft to be used on the Lake. Boat Storage Units does not include such a space or facility located on land unless it is used in conjunction with a commercial dock; Watercraft" means any vessel, boat, canoe, raft, barge, sailboard, or any similar device used or useable for carry- ing and transporting persons on the Lake "Unrestricted Watercraft" means any boat or vessel for use on or stored on the public waters of the lake which is: 16 feet or less in length and un-motorized; or 16 feet or less in length and which uses a motor of 10 horsepower or less; or 20 feet or less in length and un-

78 Attachment F

motorized, and which is propelled solely by human power. Neighborhood interviews, Interview with Gunlock Neighbor interview Wayzata Police Department, Accident Reports March 4, 1990 letter from City Attorney Richard Peterson to the City Council DNR Cooperative Agreement Wayzata Facility May 6, 1997 2004 DNR Survey typical week end survey time 2 to 4 PM and typical week day time is 5 to 7 PM. The DNR has complete a study in 2009 but the results are not available yet Discussion with ramps users August 7, 2009 Wayzata Police Department Traffic Accident Records 2005 through August 2009 Interview with Deputy Sheriff Chris Matheson, Sept 18, 2009 That is a property right to have the land use The courts have interpreted that the burden of proof is on the applicant for a conditional use permit to prove to the City Council that the provision listed above are satisfied. Should the City Council acting in quasi- judicial/administrative role denies the permit, the burden of proof changes to the City to prove in a court of law that the conditions were not satisfied. City Zoning Ordinance page 29, page 68 1971 City Ordinance Section 801.01.5 City Zoning Ordinance page 52-3 City Zoning Ordinance page 4-2 Article 5 United State Constitution The LMCD powers to regulate docks is superior to municipal powers. MS 103.641: Subject to the provisions of chapters 97A( game and Fish), 103D(Water shed Districts), 103E(drainage), 103G DNR and waters of the State, and 115( Water Pollution Control and Sanitary Districts), and the rules and regulations of the respective agencies and governing bodies vested with jurisdiction and authority under those chapters, the district has the following powers on Lake Minnetonka, excluding the area of public drainage ditches or watercourses connected to the lake:to regulate the construction, installation, and maintenance of permanent and temporary docks and moor- ingsconsistent with federal and state law; to regulate the construction, configuration, size, location, and maintenance of commercial marinas and their related facilities including parking areas and sanitary facilities. The regulation shall be consistent with the applicable municipal building codes and zoning ordinances where the marinas are located; Subdivision 1.Authority and effect. (a) The district may adopt rules and regulations to effectuate the purpose of its establishment and the powers granted to the district. (b) The rules and regulations have the effect of an ordinance if declared by the board of directors of the district and stated in the rule or regulation Zoning ordinance page 20-15 Zoning ordinance page 93-2, Flood Rate Insurance Map Zoning ordinance page 20-16, 21-17, 1974 Conditional Use Permit John Archer, Phd University of Minnesota The neighbors and property owners who allowed us to take picture from their property for the view analysis Wayzata yacht Club Members and files

79 Attachment F

Chapter Two Planning Area Site Analysis Folder The following maps, pictures, and plans included in this section will be available in large scale at the charrette:

80 Attachment F

81 Attachment F

82 Attachment F

83 Attachment F

84 Attachment F

85 Attachment F

. 86 Attachment F

Chapter Three White Papers Folder CD Folder only This folder can be accessed on the CD. It contains the following discussions papers and information: Sailing History Adaptive Sailing Sailing Schools Discussion and Context Sensitive Design Eastman Lane Lake Minnetonka Dredging Policy Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Summary of Dock and Boat Storage Rules Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Cooperative Agreement For a Public Boat Ramp City of Wayzata and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Green Parking Green Parking Lots, Planning by Design: Montgomery County Planning Commission Bioretention Applications Environmental Protection Agency Field Evaluation of Permeable Pavements for Stormwater Management Environmental Protection Agency Green Parking Rehbein Environmental Solutions Cultural Resource Study

Chapter Four Context Photos CD Folder only This folder can be accessed on the CD. It contains the following context Pictures Yacht Club Club house, land east of the club house and docks West parking lot, public boat launch and docks East Parking Lot

Sailing center Arlington Circle South Fire lane Eastman Lane