The URL can be used to link to this page

2025-06-10 WS City Council Agenda WORK SESSION RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, BARTHOLOMEW ROOM JUNE 10, 2025 5:30 PM Call to order 1. Council training and review of the Board Portal options available to Council. 2. Presentation by Lupe Development on a housing development proposed for the American Legion site, 6501 Portland Avenue. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9739. AGENDA SECTION: Work Session Items AGENDA ITEM # 1. STAFF REPORT NO. 18 WORK SESSION 6/10/2025 REPORT PREPARED BY: Michelle Friedrich, City Clerk DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: ITEM FOR WORK SESSION: Council training and review of the Board Portal options available to Council. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Board Portal feature of the city's new agenda and meeting management software helps elected officials and commissioners stay informed and organized with flexible access to meeting materials, personal repositories, and interactive tools. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: A.HISTORICAL CONTEXT B.EQUITABLE OR STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS OR IMPACTS C.POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): D.CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: E.FINANCIAL IMPACT: F.LEGAL CONSIDERATION: ALTERNATIVE(S): PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: AGENDA SECTION: Work Session Items AGENDA ITEM # 2. STAFF REPORT NO. 19 WORK SESSION 6/10/2025 REPORT PREPARED BY: Julie Urban, Asst. Community Development Director DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Melissa Poehlman, Community Development Director 6/4/2025 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager 6/4/2025 ITEM FOR WORK SESSION: Presentation by Lupe Development on a housing development proposed for the American Legion site, 6501 Portland Avenue. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The American Legion site was first proposed for redevelopment in 2020. Recognizing the value of the site to Veterans Memorial Park and to the community as a whole, the City Council passed a moratorium on development for the area surrounding Vets Park, and following study and community engagement, adopted the Portland Avenue and 66th Street Overlay Zoning District (Overlay District) for the Legion site and other properties located in and around Vets Park. The Legion originally proposed to redevelop the site itself as a "Veterans Village," including Legion offices, a restaurant, banquet space, and 180 units of rental housing. Unable to obtain financing for the proposal, the Legion began marketing the property for sale in 2024. In December of 2024, MSP Commercial, in cooperation with Lupe Development (Developer), purchased the property. The Developer is proposing 329 units in a two-phased housing development. Phase I would include 177 units of family housing with a mix of bedroom sizes (studio to four bedrooms). Phase II would include 152 units of senior housing. Both projects would provide affordability levels between 30% and 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) with an average just under 60% AMI. The Developer will present its concept at the work session. DIRECTION NEEDED: Policymakers should listen to the presentation and provide feedback, especially on the following questions: 1. How well does the plan meet expectations for the Overlay District, including: - connectivity between the development and Vets Park and the neighborhood; - diversity of housing options (i.e., does a mixture of family housing and senior housing meet this intent); - convenient commercial; - building massing and transition; - building heights; - parking, and - sustainable development? 2. Would policymakers support variances (i.e., are there practical difficulties) from the following requirements: - building height of the Phase I building (six vs. five stories); - parking (under-parked by 135 stalls); - no primary building entrance on Portland Avenue; - reduced building step-back requirements, and - a reduction in the number of EV chargers provided? 3. Are policy-makers in support of a fully-affordable concept for this site? 4. Does the proposed development warrant providing financial assistance from either the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and/or Tax Increment Financing (TIF)? 5. Would the City Council and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) consider approving resolutions offering preliminary support for the proposed concept plans to aid the Developer in seeking project financing? BACKGROUND INFORMATION: A.HISTORICAL CONTEXT In 2021, the Council approved the Portland Avenue and 66th Street Study and adopted the ordinance creating the Portland Avenue and 66th Street Overlay Zoning District. Together, the study and Overlay District guide future development and ensure that private and public investments in the area work together for mutual benefit. B.EQUITABLE OR STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS OR IMPACTS Redevelopment of the Legion site offers the opportunity to diversify the City's tax base, as envisioned by the Strategic Plan; however, any units restricted to households earning less than 60% AMI will qualify for 4(d) tax status, which taxes qualified affordable housing properties at a reduced rate of 0.25%. The Strategic Plan also seeks to maintain Richfield as an affordable place to live, and the proposed plan offers a range of affordability levels. Affordable housing provides housing opportunities and stability for residents with lower incomes, including larger units for families with children and units specific to seniors. C.POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): The 2040 Richfield Comprehensive Plan recognizes Veterans Memorial Park as one of the City’s premier destinations and envisions ways to strengthen development in the area. The property is zoned MR-3 and guided high-density residential and is also subject to the Portland Avenue and 66th Street Overlay Zoning District. The MR-3 Zoning District is currently under review and proposed changes to the district are expected before the Planning Commission and City Council in August. D.CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: Current proposed timeline: Summer 2025 - community engagement, submit for land use approvals, apply for Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding 2026 - apply to Hennepin County for affordable housing and Transit-Oriented Communities funding and to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) for redevelopment funding Late 2026 - apply for bonds and tax credits from Minnesota Management & Budget (MMB) 2027 - start construction E.FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Developer anticipates asking for financial assistance for the project including gap financing from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and potentially the creation of a TIF district. The Developer will seek bonding and 4% tax credits to provide the primary financing for the project. All units restricted to households earning less than 60% of the AMI will qualify for 4(d) tax status, which taxes at a rate of 0.25%. Those units renting at a level higher than 60% AMI will be taxed at the apartment rate of 1.25%. F.LEGAL CONSIDERATION: NA ALTERNATIVE(S): NA PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: Aaron Diederich, Lupe Development Greta Norris, Eli Zmira, and Joseph Kimbell, Pope Architects ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Legion concept plans Backup Material Portland 66th Sub Area Study Backup Material VPA Overlay District Backup Material Work Session Presentation Backup Material 6501Portland Avenue Development Hand-Sketched Ground View The Site - Full Context Site Perspectives - Aerial Views Site Plan - Enlarged ZONING DATA LOT AREA Parcel 4.16 Acres (181,044.26 SF) Zoning District High-density residential (MR-3) Overlay Veteran’s Park area overlay Building Setbacks Front 15’-0” min, 25’-0” max Side 30’ or the height of the building, whichever is greater Rear 35’-0” or the height of the building, whichever is greater Side and rear setbacks adjacent to Veteran’s Park shall prioritize greenscape. Minimum Lot Coverage:40% (principal structure) Height 20’ min, 55’ max (or 5 stories, whichever is less) measured from avarage grade plane elevation Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. | Architectural Site Plan RICHFIELD, MN | 05.14.2025 | M#24-244 N 0 50 100 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 1 - PARK CONNECTION 2 - WALK UP UNIT PATIOS3 - PICKLEBALL COURT4 - PLAY AREA5 - AMENITY PATIO6 - COMMUNITY GARDEN7 - PET RELIEF AREA KEY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 5 Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. | Architectural Site Plan RICHFIELD, MN | 05.14.2025 | M#24-244 N 0 50 100 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 1 - PARK CONNECTION2 - WALK UP UNIT PATIOS3 - PICKLEBALL COURT4 - PLAY AREA5 - AMENITY PATIO6 - COMMUNITY GARDEN7 - PET RELIEF AREA KEY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 5 The Buildings - Ground Floor Phase 1Phase 2 PROJECT DATA PHASE 1 Building SF 215,000 SF Unit Count 177 Parking 129 Surface 31 Underground 98 PHASE 2 Building SF 150,000 SF Unit Count 152 Parking 98 Surface 33 Underground 65 OVERALL Building SF 365,000 SF Unit Count 329 Parking 227 Surface 64 Underground 163 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT 1,505.8 SF AMENITY 619.5 SF AMENITY PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SURFACE PARKING PICKLEBALL COURT SURFACE PARKING PORTLAND AVECONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK CONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK PLAY AREA PATIO PATIO SETBACK 30'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"MIN 15'-0" MAX 25'-0" WALK UP UNIT PATIOS D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - GROUND FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY GROUND FLOOR - UC LAYOUT LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF)ZONING DISTRICT: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY:VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAX SIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATERSIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT: 20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1 BUILDING SF: 215,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 177PARKING: 129SURFACE: 31UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2BUILDING SF: 150,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98 SURFACE: 33 UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALLBUILDING SF: 365,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 329 PARKING: 227SURFACE: 64UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA AMENITY LOBBY LOBBY 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT 1,505.8 SF AMENITY 619.5 SF AMENITY PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SURFACE PARKING PICKLEBALL COURT SURFACE PARKING PORTLAND AVECONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK CONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK PLAY AREA PATIO PATIO SETBACK 30'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"MIN 15'-0" MAX 25'-0" WALK UP UNIT PATIOS D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - GROUND FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY GROUND FLOOR - UC LAYOUT LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF) ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY: VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAX SIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATERSIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT:20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 177 PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALLBUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64 UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA AMENITY LOBBY LOBBY The Buildings - Typical Floors (2-5) PROJECT DATA PHASE 1 Building SF 215,000 SF Unit Count 177 Parking 129 Surface 31 Underground 98 PHASE 2 Building SF 150,000 SF Unit Count 152 Parking 98 Surface 33 Underground 65 OVERALL Building SF 365,000 SF Unit Count 329 Parking 227 Surface 64 Underground 163 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT PHASE 1 PHASE 2 D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - TYPICAL FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 05/14/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY 1" = 30'-0"A-0061TYPICAL FLOOR 2-5 LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF) ZONING DISTRICT: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY:VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAX SIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATERSIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT: 20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 177PARKING: 129SURFACE: 31 UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 152 PARKING: 98SURFACE: 33 UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALL BUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA Phase 1Phase 2 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT 1,505.8 SF AMENITY 619.5 SF AMENITY PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SURFACE PARKING PICKLEBALL COURT SURFACE PARKING PORTLAND AVECONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK CONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK PLAY AREA PATIO PATIO SETBACK 30'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"MIN 15'-0" MAX 25'-0" WALK UP UNIT PATIOS D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - GROUND FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY GROUND FLOOR - UC LAYOUT LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF) ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY: VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAX SIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATERSIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT:20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 177 PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALLBUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64 UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA AMENITY LOBBY LOBBY 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT PHASE 1PHASE 2 D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - PARKING RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY 1" = 30'-0"A-0081 P1 - UC LAYOUT PARKING LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF) ZONING DISTRICT: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY: VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAX SIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT: 20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 177PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 152 PARKING: 98 SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALL BUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329 PARKING: 227SURFACE: 64 UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA The Buildings - Parking PROJECT DATA PHASE 1 Building SF 215,000 SF Unit Count 177 Parking 129 Surface 31 Underground 98 PHASE 2 Building SF 150,000 SF Unit Count 152 Parking 98 Surface 33 Underground 65 OVERALL Building SF 365,000 SF Unit Count 329 Parking 227 Surface 64 Underground 163 Phase 1Phase 2 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT 1,505.8 SF AMENITY 619.5 SF AMENITY PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SURFACE PARKING PICKLEBALL COURT SURFACE PARKING PORTLAND AVECONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK CONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK PLAY AREA PATIO PATIO SETBACK 30'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"MIN 15'-0" MAX 25'-0" WALK UP UNIT PATIOS D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - GROUND FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY GROUND FLOOR - UC LAYOUT LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF) ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY: VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAX SIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATERSIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT:20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 177 PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALLBUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64 UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA AMENITY LOBBY LOBBY Lupe Development Experience - Intergenerational campus offering 195 total units of affordable housing. - Brings much-needed affordable housing to the neighborhood, and bridges this need by accommodating various demographics including aging seniors, entry-level workers, and families. - Close proximity to transit, jobs, retail and services. Snelling Yards Affordable Housing & the Hillock (Minneapolis, MN) 550 W. Lake Street Apartments, AKA the Lakefield (Minneapolis, MN) The Flats at Malcolm Yards (Minneapolis, MN) - Project brings 110 total units of affordable housing to Minneapolis’ Lyn-Lake neighborhood as part of broader mixed-income housing campus. - Close proximity to transit, jobs, retail and services. - 143-unit income-qualified apartment within Malcolm Yards community - All units at 60% medium income or less, & 16 units of supportive housing for those at immediate risk of homelessness - Amenities: sky deck community room, rooftop patio with grill station, fitness center, pet wash, EV parking stations, bike storage, etc. Lupe Development Experience - 118-unit affordable 55+ apartment community, filling a gap within an otherwise high-rent district. - Studio, 1- and 2-bedroom units at or below 30%-80% AMI. - Redevelopment of vacant site walkable to nearby neighborhoods, transit, medical, & retail amenities. Forty-Forty Flats (Edina, MN) Wirth on the Woods Campus, the Eloise & the Theodore (Minneapolis, MN) - 200 total 55+ units (100 affordable, 100 market-rate) in Bryn Mawr neighborhood. - 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units. THANK YOU! PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDY CITY OF RICHFIELD, MN | JUNE 2021 PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN02 STUDY PURPOSE The purpose of the Portland Avenue & 66th Street Sub Area Study is to guide future private development in proximity to Veterans Memorial Park. The 2040 Richfield Comprehensive Plan recognizes Veterans Memorial Park as one of the City’s premier destinations and envisions ways to strengthen development in the area. The Comprehensive Plan guides land in the vicinity of the park for a mix of uses, including medium to high-density residential and community commercial. The Plan does not provide guidance about how private redevelopment in the area will interact with Veterans Memorial Park. To help ensure that private investments work in harmony with Veterans Memorial Park and upcoming investments (D-Line Bus Rapid Transit), the City commissioned this study to determine the appropriate land use controls for the area (see Figure 1). Study objectives include: »Establish development principles that define how different types of redevelopment can be designed to be compatible with adjacent neighborhoods and Veterans Memorial Park. Development principles are intended to be a tool for the community, the Planning Commission, City Council, and City Staff to assist in planning, designing, and evaluating future development proposals for the study area. »Explore potential zoning changes to align property that is currently zoned for Low-Density Residential, but guided by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, or Community Commercial land uses. »Recommend a preferred approach for implementation (e.g., zoning districts and an overlay district). »To avoid Comprehensive Plan amendments. The Comprehensive Plan and the Land Use Plan reflects a common vision for the area that has been determined through a separate planning process. The vision for the study area has included a mix of Medium to High Density Residential and Community Commercial uses dating back to the 1998 Comprehensive Plan. JUNE 2021 03 ´0500FeetLegendProject BoundaryProject BoundaryParcelsFigURE 1. STUDY AREA • Richfield HRA Property PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN04 PLANNING FOUNDATION This study presents an opportunity to imagine how redevelopment around Portland Avenue and 66th Street might complement Veterans Memorial Park. it is also an opportunity to consider a much broader vision for the area, which includes future bus rapid transit (D-Line), improved pedestrian/bicycle connections, and the potential for residential development with increased density. The following plans help describe this vision in more detail and were used to help inform this study. 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (ADOPTED IN 2018) The City of Richfield is required by state law to update its Comprehensive Plan every ten years. The last update was approved in 2018. The Comprehensive Plan is a statement of what the City of Richfield wants to become. it is a set of goals and policies designed to achieve a community wide vision. The Comprehensive Plan is based on a composition of concepts, patterns, and relationships that deal with integrating the social aspects of a community with its physical development. it includes directives for maintaining strong residential neighborhoods, it emphasizes the importance of parks and open space, and it seeks to maintain quality infrastructure. One of the more prominent chapters in the Comprehensive Plan includes the Land Use Plan. it gives people a visual representation of what the community is expected to look like in the future. As it pertains to the study area, the Land Use Plan has guided property along Portland Avenue and 66th Street for High Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Community Commercial (see Figure 2). The Land Use Plan for this area has stayed relatively the same from previous Comprehensive Plans - dating back to the 1998 Comprehensive Plan. 66TH STREET CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN (MARCH 2011) The 66th Street Corridor Master Plan seeks to improve the economic viability and market position of existing and future uses on the 66th Street Corridor, while enhancing the pedestrian character and enhancing the multimodal opportunities of the corridor. The Plan addresses land use, transportation and open space aspects of the corridor and provides recommendations for future improvements. JUNE 2021 05 LOGAN75th VINCENTUPTONTHOMASWASHBURNXERXESI - 494 78th 77th 76th OLIVERNEWTONMORGANSHERIDANRUSSELLQUEENPENN74th 72nd 73th 71st 69th 70th DUPONTKNOXJAMESIRVINGHUMBOLDTGIRARDFREMONTEMERSONCOLFAXBRYANTALDRICHGARFIELDGRANDHARRIETLYNDALECROSSTOWN HWY 62nd 67th 68th 66th 65th 64th 63rd COLUMBUS2nd1stSTEVENSPLEASANTPILLSBURYBLAISDELLWENTWORTHNICOLLET3rdCLINTON4th5thPORTLANDOAKLANDPARK10th11th12th13th14thELLIOTCHICAGO15th16th17th18thCEDARBLOOMINGTONI-494 19008009001000110012001300180060050040030020050100124200300324400500620700720800900100011001300140015001600170018001001524190060012000007001400290028002700260025002200210020003000150016001700240031002300Current Land Use Map UPDATED: 5/1/2019 Current Land Use Water Park Detached Residential Attached Residential Commercial Mixed Use Public/Quasi-Public Vacant Right-of-Way Railroad Quasi-Public SCH DPLX ±0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles BICYCLE MASTER PLAN (2012) AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN (2018) Richfield has adopted a Bicycle Master Plan and Pedestrian Master Plan, which help describe the importance pedestrian and bicycle networks play in the City’s overall transportation system by offering an alternative means of transportation. Both of the Plan’s recognize Portland Avenue and 66th Street as important corridors that help pedestrians and bicyclists move throughout the community. The Bicycle Master Plan also recognizes Portland Avenue as part of the Metropolitan Council’s Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN). According to the Metropolitan Council, the RBTN make up the “trunk arterials” of the overall system of bikeways that connect to regional employment and activity centers. METRO D-LINE – BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) Construction of the METRO D Line bus rapid transit (BRT) project is scheduled to begin in early 2021. The D Line will substantially replace Metro Transit Route 5 with fast, frequent, and all-day service. Bus rapid transit brings better amenities, faster service and a more comfortable ride. The D-Line corridor follows Chicago Avenue and Portland Avenue to American Boulevard, ending at the Mall of America. The alignment serves North Minneapolis, Downtown Minneapolis, the Midtown area medical facilities, and the Chicago-Lake Transit Center. The alignment crosses into Richfield south of TH 62, then turns east on American Boulevard, serving commercial uses before ending at the Mall of America. Planned BRT stops along Portland Avenue in Richfield include 60th, 66th, 70th, 73rd, and 77th Street. LOGAN75th VINCENTUPTONTHOMASWASHBURNXERXESI - 494 78th 77th 76th OLIVERNEWTONMORGANSHERIDANRUSSELLQUEENPENN74th 72nd 73th 71st 69th 70th DUPONTKNOXJAMESIRVINGHUMBOLDTGIRARDFREMONTEMERSONCOLFAXBRYANTALDRICHGARFIELDGRANDHARRIETLYNDALECROSSTOWN HWY 62nd 67th 68th 66th 65th 64th 63rd COLUMBUS2nd1stSTEVENSPLEASANTPILLSBURYBLAISDELLWENTWORTHNICOLLET3rdCLINTON4th5thPORTLANDOAKLANDPARK10th11th12th13th14thELLIOTCHICAGO15th16th17th18thCEDARBLOOMINGTONI-494 19008009001000110012001300180060050040030020050100124200300324400500620700720800900100011001300140015001600170018001001524190060012000007001400290028002700260025002200210020003000150016001700240031002300Current Land Use Map UPDATED: 5/1/2019 Current Land Use Water Park Detached Residential Attached Residential Commercial Mixed Use Public/Quasi-Public Vacant Right-of-Way Railroad Quasi-Public SCH DPLX ±0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles FigURE 2. EXiSTiNg LAND USE Study Area PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN06 PLANNING PROCESS The study’s planning process occurred over a six month period between January 2021 and June 2021. During this time, the City placed a moratorium on development until June 24, 2021 to allow time to explore appropriate development controls for the study area. The planning process included opportunities for property owners, community members, members of the American Legion, and Veterans Memorial Park users to share ideas and comment on draft materials. Community engagement was predominately structured around on-line engagement to ensure people could stay involved during the pandemic, while physically distancing. The study’s outreach efforts are highlight below. Study Website: A study website was created to host on-line surveys and informational videos. The website contained study information, updates, key findings, recommendations, and invitations to participate in the planning process. Postcard Mailing: Postcards were mailed to property owners in proximity of the park to inform them about the study and how to provide feedback. Survey: Early on in the planning process, a survey was posted on the project website (see Attachment A). The survey helped gain a better understanding of the public’s thoughts on potential development within the study area. A virtual tour of precedents (examples) throughout the metro was also used to depict Medium to High Density Developments for the study to consider. A total of 75 people responded to the survey or wrote comments directly to staff. general themes from those who participated include: »People generally support a mix of land uses and higher density residential developments (e.g., condos, apartments, and senior housing). »There is a strong desire to see improved pedestrian/bicycle connections within the park and between developments and the park. »People are concerned about building heights, traffic volumes, and the potential increase in park users associated with a new development. JUNE 2021 07 Another survey was launched near the end of the planning process to confirm the study’s design principles and draft findings (see Attachment B). A total of 110 people responded to the survey or wrote comments directly to staff (between May 6 and May 14, 2021). general themes from those who participated include: »People largely agree redevelopment projects should enhance connections to the park. »People largely agree redevelopment projects should embrace sustainable design practices. »People strongly agree that building heights should be minimized to protect views to/from the park’s open areas. »A large number of people disagree redevelopment should expand the mix of housing or commercial uses in the area. »Written comments suggest more can be done to educate the public about the City’s Comprehensive Plan and how it guides private development. it is important to note this study explores ways to balance private development in proximity to the park. Veterans Memorial Park is not being proposed for redevelopment. Informational Videos: informational videos were posted on the project website. The informational videos included a presentation with a voice over explaining the materials. The first video explained the study purpose and objectives, while the second video highlighted key findings and draft recommendations. Stakeholder Meetings: One particular area of focus included the north-east quadrant of 66th Street and Portland Avenue. This site includes the Richfield ice Area, Richfield Swimming Pool, American Legion, and Morris Nilsen Funeral Chapel, and a Memorial for Veterans. A larger portion of this site is guided for High Density Residential and owned by the American Legion. The Consultant Team met and/or spoke with American Legion representatives on several occasions to discuss their aspiration for development and to share study findings. Project Management Team: The Project Management Team (PMT) included the consultant team and City staff. The PMT met three times to review and discuss study finding and coordinate public engagement activities. City Council/Planning Commission Workshop: On April 27, 2021, City Staff and the Consultant Team met with the City Council and representatives from the Planning Commission and Community Services Commission to discuss preliminary work and public outreach activities related to the study. PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN08 DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES The development principles are used to help express the community’s expectations for development within the study area. The development principles were developed using community input and direction from City staff and elected leaders. »Personal Connections: Support redevelopment projects that preserves and enhances the ability of residents and users of Veterans Memorial Park to make personal connections to the park. »Park & Neighborhood Connectivity: increase connectivity to Veterans Memorial Park by incorporating vehicle, pedestrian, wheelchair/walker, and bicycle connections between park destinations (e.g., the Memorial, lake, ice arena, and swimming pool), neighborhoods, and redevelopment sites along Portland Avenue and 66th Street. »Diversify Housing Options: Use redevelopment sites to expand the mix of housing in the area (e.g. row/townhouse, affordable units, courtyard apartments, courtyard cottages, and live-work units). »Convenient Commercial: Encourage a mix of community and small neighborhood commercial businesses in proximity to residential areas and the park destinations as an important amenity for residents and park visitors. »Sustainable Development: Use sustainable design practices and new technology in developments that will help create a healthy, sustainable, vibrant neighborhood, and contribute to the park environment. »Building Transition: Require site design and building architectural characteristics that provide appropriate transitions between single family residential neighborhoods and higher intensity uses. »Building Heights: Locate the tallest portions of buildings away from adjacent low density residences. For sites adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park, locate the tallest portions of buildings away from the park’s open areas. »Building Massing: Locate and design buildings to preserve views to/from the park’s open areas and minimize potential shadowing of the park. »Quantity of Parking: Minimize parking needs by leveraging the study area’s location along multimodal corridors to reduce the use of the automobile, while limiting neighborhood impacts. JUNE 2021 09 EXISTING CONDITIONS The following section provides an overview of the study area’s existing conditions. EXISTING LAND USES Veterans Park is one of Richfield’s signature parks that offers a variety of recreational and programming activities, community gathering spaces, walking paths, and scenic views. The Park’s southwest corner has been anchored by the Minneapolis/Richfield American Legion Post #435 since 1956. The study area is approximately 77 acres (excludes roads). Based on the City’s Existing Land Use Map (see Figure 2), the study area is comprised of approximately 39% single family homes, 5% multifamily residential, 11% commercial, 44% public land, and 1% vacant. The existing commercial (e.g., American Legion) and public land uses (e.g., ice arena) are characterized by larger surface parking lots and low lot coverages. The bulk of single family homes were built in the 1940s and 1950s, while multifamily residential land uses followed in the late 1950s and early 1960s. ZONING Existing zoning in the study area (see Figure 3) consists of: »Single Family Residential District (R): The purposes of the R District regulations are to protect and preserve the single-family residential character of the R District; reserve appropriate locations for single-family dwellings; provide opportunities for cluster housing development; minimize traffic congestion and the overloading of utilities; and provide residential locations that are safe, attractive and quiet. »Multifamily Residential District (MR-2): The purposes of the MR-2 District regulations are to reserve appropriately located areas for multifamily dwellings; preserve as many as possible of the desirable characteristics of the single-family residential district while permitting higher population densities; provide opportunities for infill cluster housing development, thereby allowing greater intensities and a wider variety of housing types; minimize traffic congestion and avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size (or density) in relation to the surrounding land, buildings, or infrastructure; and to provide multifamily residential areas that are safe and attractive. PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN10 »High-Density Multi-family Residential District (MR-3): The purpose of the MR-3 District regulations are to reserve appropriately located areas for family living in a variety of types of dwellings at a reasonable range of population densities; preserve as many as possible of the desirable characteristics of the single-family district, while permitting higher population densities; provide space for semi-public facilities needed to complement urban residential areas and space for institutions that require a residential environment; minimize traffic congestion and avoid the overloading of utilities by preventing the construction of buildings of excessive size in relation to the surrounding infrastructure; and to provide multifamily residential areas that are safe and attractive. »General Business District (C-2): The C-2 District allows a wide variety of retail and service businesses that may serve a trade area encompassing Richfield and beyond. Despite the commercial nature of these land uses, the City expects them to have an attractive appearance from all sides, to be compatible with nearly residential properties, to minimize adverse effects on surface waters, and to not significantly degrade the level of service or safety on nearby roads. PLANNED LAND USES (2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) The planned land uses identified in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan (see Figure 4) for the study area consists of: »Low Density Residential (LDR): The LDR category has been derived from the Single-family Residential category dating back to the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. The LDR category allows for the mixture of single-family detached and attached units, such as duplexes and lower density townhomes. LDR development ranges from 1 to 7 units per acre. FigURE 3. ZONiNg Study Area JUNE 2021 11 »Medium Density Residential (MDR): The MDR land use category was derived from the MDR and the Medium- High Density Residential (MHD) category included in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. These two categories have been combined to better clarify development patterns and the intent to allow for higher density housing, such as townhomes or condominiums ranging from 8 to 34 units per acre. The allowed density would be limited to no more than 4 stories. The MDR category also includes manufactured homes and some presence of office use. »High Density Residential (HDR): HDR includes multi-unit and multi-building developments at a more intense scale. HDR development ranges from 35 to 100 units per acre. HDR uses are primarily located in areas convenient to transportation, shopping and social services in order to support higher concentration of people. Development greater than 100 units per acre can be achieved through the PUD approval process. The appropriate building height will vary by development and depends upon the characteristics of the development and its surroundings. The HDR category would also allow for some presence of office use. »Community Commercial (CC): CC accommodates a wide variety of retail goods and services that are more intense than neighborhood scale commercial, but generally not uses that attract customers from throughout the Twin Cities metropolitan area. CC uses are intended to serve residents of Richfield and the immediate vicinity around Richfield. CC uses are primarily located along major local corridors, such as 66th Street, Penn Avenue, Nicollet Avenue, and Portland Avenue. Office uses would preferable be located above retail uses or situated in stand-alone building developments. Overall developments could be up to a total building size of 150,000 square feet (Floor Area Ratio of 0.5 to 1.0). ´0 400Feet Legend Project Boundary Project Boundary 2040 Planned Land Use Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial ROW Parcels ´0 400Feet Legend Project Boundary Project Boundary 2040 Planned Land Use Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial ROW Parcels FigURE 4. 2040 COMPREHENSiVE PLAN PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN12 REDEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS in recent months, the City and property owners adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park have received multiple inquiries about redevelopment options. One area of interest has been the American Legion property, which is guided for High Density Residential (HDR). The American Legion has expressed interest in redeveloping their property. At the time of this study, the American Legion reported that they were exploring all of their development options including standalone building(s) and mixed use building(s) that include residential units (market rate and Veterans housing), meeting and banquets space, and a restaurant/bar. This study assumed the American Legion will continue to have a presence on site and require a 10,000 to 14,000 square foot space to meet their needs. Another area of interest includes property owned by the Richfield Housing Redevelopment Authority (HRA). Their property is located on the east side of Portland Avenue and south of 66th Street (see Figure 1). The HRA has plans to develop this property at some point in time and is guided for Medium Density Residential (MDR). This will likely include attached housing units (e.g., townhomes) that front Portland Avenue. ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES Figure 5 depicts issues and opportunities discovered during the planning study process. This map helps convey some of the items property owners and developers should be aware of when exploring their development options. Respectfully, a majority of these issues and opportunities are associated with the American Legion property as it pertains to high density residential development. The following items (key) corresponds with Figure 5. A. There is a strong desire to improve pedestrian and bicycle connections between properties and the Memorial. B. There is an established tree line that is viewed by many as an amenity and serves as a buffer between the Memorial and buildings/parking lots. C. There are limitations on how this property can be used (e.g., development or stormwater management) based on DNR rules and regulations. D. in general, the public is concerned about potential impacts (building heights and traffic) a development may have on this site with the park, pool, and ice arena. E. The American Legion property is guided for High-Density Residential and zoned for Single Family Residential and is considering their development options. F. There is a 20 foot grade change between Portland Avenue and the ice arena. g. There are limited opportunities to connect a roads between a development and the ice arena. Vehicle traffic should be handled internally and be separated from the ice arena parking lot. However, there are opportunities to build stronger pedestrian and bicycle connections between a property, Veterans Memorial Park, ice arena, and pool. H. Accessible parking is needed for the Memorial. i. There are concerns that future development may have potential implications to the pool (shading). A B C D E F G H I JUNE 2021 13 J. This site is guided for Community Commercial. There are no redevelopment assumptions known at this time. K. These locations represent future Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stations. This project is scheduled to begin in early 2021. L. Hennepin County is the responsible roadway agency for Portland Avenue and 66th Street. Therefore, development proposals will likely be required to submit a traffic study to Hennepin County for their review. A traffic study typically describes any access modifications to the site, anticipated traffic volumes associated with a new development, travel demand management strategies, and an analysis of the development’s impacts to exiting and future traffic operations. M. The Richfield HRA owns three parcels near the proposed BRT station that are guided for Medium Density Residential (MDR). Portland & 66th Sub Area Study A C E K K I H D L F B BRT BRT J G M FigURE 5. iSSUES AND CONTEXT J K L M PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN14 ZONING EVALUATION The City’s official controls include ordinances, fiscal devices and public programs that are established to carry out the Comprehensive Plan’s land use, housing, transportation, public infrastructure, parks and open space goals and policies. The City’s Ordinances, as established in the City Code, are the primary tools for implementing the Comprehensive Plan’s goals and policies. Of particular note and relevance to the Comprehensive Plan is Chapter V and Appendix B of the City Code, which contain planning and land use regulations, and the City’s Zoning Code. Official controls, such as zoning regulations, subdivision regulations, and the zoning map are required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. it is important to note this study does not explore any changes to the Comprehensive Plan. The 2018 Comprehensive Plan went through a separate planning process that established the study area’s planned land use designation (e.g., Medium to High Density Residential), which date back to the 1998 Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS There are several zoning changes that should occur in the study area to better align a property’s land use plan designation in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan (see Figure 4) with the appropriate zoning district (see Figure 3). Findings from this evaluation are summarized below: 1. There are twenty (20) parcels guided for Medium Density Residential (MDR) and zoned for Single Family Residential (R). The most appropriate zoning district that aligns with the MDR land use designation for this area is Multifamily Residential District (MR-2). 2. The American Legion site is guided for High Density Residential (HDR) and zoned Single Family Residential (R). The most appropriate zoning district that aligns with the HDR land use designation for this area is High-Density Residential District (MR-3). 3. Property that is guided for Community Commercial (CC) are zoned accordingly - general Business District (C-2). 4. Property that is guided for Low Density Residential (LDR) are zoned accordingly – Single Family Residential (R). JUNE 2021 15 SITE CAPACITY STUDY Concepts were created to test the development capacity for properties guided by the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan for Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential (see Attachment C). Areas of focus include the American Legion, property owned by the HRA (see Figure 1), and a select number of properties along 66th Street. The concepts were reviewed and discussed between the Consultant Team and Project Management Team. The concepts were also used to help facilitate discussions with stakeholders (i.e., American Legion and Hennepin County) and elected leaders. The concepts served the following purposes: »To articulate the study’s design principles »To evaluate potential access points »To test density ranges and building heights (see sidebar) »To test parking requirements and needs »To generate ideas for design standards »To identify potential development constraints it is important to recognize the concepts are not intended to represent specific development plans. They should be viewed as ideas and a source of inspiration when exploring redevelopment options that are consistent with the study’s design principles, 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and recommended zoning changes. PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN16 BUILDING HEIGHT There are significant differences in typical building heights for residential, commercial, office and mixed use buildings. For example, residential buildings tend to have lower ceiling heights (10 to 12 feet) than retail or office space (12 to 14 feet). The MR-3 zoning district has a maximum building height of 50 feet. This development regulation is intended to limit building heights to five stories. However, a five story (50 foot maximum) residential building may be hard to achieve based on today’s construction standards when integrating a commercial use (e.g., American Legion) on the first floor. This is demonstrated in Figure 6. Figure 6 also suggests a maximum building height of 55 feet could provide enough flexibility for a developer to achieve a five story residential building with a commercial use. A five story building (~55 feet) was further tested to help address the following items: »Visual impacts to the park and Memorial »Shading implications to the pool »Site lines from Portland Avenue and 66th Street »Relationship (scale) with adjacent single family homes This was achieved by creating a visual 3D model (see Attachment D) that offers different perspective points between a 55 foot building(s) and its relationship to the park and adjacent land uses. A shadow study was also created to determine if there is any potential shading implications to the pool during the summer solstice (see Figure 7-9). These visual aids helped determine how a new development can work in unison with the park and adjacent land uses. BUILDING HEIGHT The City uses a mix of standards in the zoning code to define building height. Examples include: • Section 507.07, Definitions: Subd. 59: “Height of building.” The vertical distance to the highest point of the roof for flat roofs; to the deck line for mansard roofs; and to the average height between the highest roof ridge and its associated eaves for gable, hip and gambrel roofs, as measured from the average elevation of the lot adjoining the front building line. • Section 507.07, Definitions: Subd. 124. “Story.” That portion of a building included between the surface of any floor and the surface of the next floor above it, or if there is no floor above it, then the space between such floor and the ceiling above it. • Section 525 Multifamily Residential District (MR-2), Subd. 525.11. Dimensional Regulations: Maximum building height is 35 feet. • Section 527 High Density Residential District (MR-3), Subd. 527.11. Dimensional Regulations: Maximum building height is 50 feet. • Section 534 general Business District (C-2), Subd. 534.11. Dimensional Requirements: Maximum building height is 40 feet. JUNE 2021 17 6’ 6’ 10’ LandscapingSidewalkSidewalkPortland Ave TownhomesPorch 42’34’44’ Apartments/CondosApartments/Condos American Legion American Legion Patio Below-ground Parking 56’ 14’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 5’ 10’ 20’50’ FigURE 6. CROSS SECTiON EXAMPLE FigURE 7. 5 STORY BUiLDiNg FigURE 8. 8 STORY BUiLDiNg FigURE 9. 12 STORY BUiLDiNg SHADOW STUDY Figures 7 - 9 helped determine if there is any potential shading implications to the pool during the summer solstice. Findings suggest buildings that exceed five stories could have potential shading implications to the park and pool. This finding may vary depending on the placement and size of the building. PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN18 FINDINGS Findings from the site capacity study (see Attachment C, visual models (see Attachment D) and shadow study (see Figure 7-9) include: 1. Building Coverage: A dimensional regulation for the MR-3 zoning district includes a maximum building coverage of 30%. The site capacity study for the American Legion property determined this percentage may limit a development’s ability to achieve higher density ranges that align with the City’s Comprehensive Plan (35 to 100 units per acre). The maximum building coverage for the MR-3 zoning district within the study area should be adjusted to reflect the City’s Mixed Use zoning districts that range between 25% and 75%. 2. Building Height: The maximum building height for the MR-3 zoning district within the study area should be adjusted by five (5) feet (50 feet to 55 feet) to provide some flexibility for meeting today’s construction standards for a mixed used residential building. 3. Building Stepbacks: Upper story stepbacks for buildings over three (3) stories will minimize visual impacts from the park, pool and adjacent land uses. 4. Front Yard Setbacks: A dimensional regulation for the MR-3 zoning district includes a minimum front yard setback of 40 feet. The site capacity study for the American Legion property determined this minimum requirement may limit a development’s ability to create more flexible open space buffers between building(s) and the park (side and rear yard). The front yard setback should be adjusted to reflect the City’s Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N), which has established a minimum 15 foot and maximum 25 foot front yard setback. 5. Land Uses: in general, City staff, elected leaders, and stakeholders are in favor of a mix of uses in the study area and agree the concepts help convey the design principles (e.g., connectivity and diversity of housing). 6. Landscaping: Established tree lines located along the American Legion’s property will help minimize visual impacts between structures and the Memorial. 7. Parking: Parking requirements may influence what can be achieved on a property from a density perspective. Shared parking strategies should be explored to minimize the number of parking spaces required for a new development. it is assumed a mix of parking (surface and structured) will be needed for a mixed-use development on the American Legion site, while providing a limited number of shared surface spaces for the Memorial. 8. Shading: Buildings that exceed five stories could have potential shading implications to the park and pool (see Figure 7-9). This finding may vary depending on the placement and size of the building. JUNE 2021 19 RECOMMENDATIONS This section identifies the recommended actions for implementing the study’s objectives and development principles, while addressing some of the study’s findings. REZONING As part of the zoning evaluation, it was determined there are inconsistencies between the study area’s planned land uses and zoning districts. These inconsistencies should be addressed to be in compliance with state law. The following recommendations include: »Parcels guided for Medium Density Residential (MDR) and zoned for Single Family Residential (R) should be rezoned for Multifamily Residential District (MR-2). Existing residential land uses will be allowed in perpetuity until a property owner choses to redevelop their property. At that time, the development will need to follow the City’s Zoning Code for a MR-2 zoning district. »The American Legion site is guided for High Density Residential (HDR) and zoned Single Family Residential (R). This site should be rezoned to High-Density Residential District (MR-3). »There are seven properties guided in the study area for Community Commercial (CC). These properties are aligned with the appropriate zoning district - general Business District (C-2). No rezoning changes are needed at this time. PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN20 ESTABLISH AN OVERLAY DISTRICT The City should consider adopting a zoning overlay district for the study area to help implement the Development Principles, while providing some flexibility for mixed used development to occur in the High-Density Residential District (MR-3) and general Business District (C-2). The purpose of an overlay district is to establish more specific design regulations for specific areas. Overlay district regulations are in addition to the requirements of the underlying or base zoning district. An overlay district typically provides requirements (or incentives) intended to preserve the character of an area. increased flexibility in setting overlay district regulations is possible since the standards can be more closely tailored to an area within the community that shares certain characteristics. The additional layer of zoning requirements proposed for this overlay district include development standards that are reflected in Attachment E and summarized throughout this section. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R) There are no development standards being recommended for the R zoning district. MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-2) Development in the MR-2 zoning district will need to be in compliance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Residential development should include residential land uses that expand the variety of lifecycle housing options in the study area. Development Standards A. Parking shall be located in the rear and/or side yards of the building. B. The minimum front yard setback shall be 10 feet and the maximum shall be 25 feet. C. Buildings entrances shall front Portland Avenue or 66th Street depending on where the property is located. D. A minimum of one primary building entrance shall face Portland Avenue or 66th Street depending on where the property is located. E. Require a Bird Collision Reduction Plan as part of new or substantially new development applications. SiNgLE FAMiLY PRECEDENT MULTi-FAMiLY PRECEDENT JUNE 2021 21 HIGH-DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) Development in the MR-3 zoning district will need to be in compliance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Residential development will include a minimum of two types of residential land uses that expand the variety of lifecycle housing options in the study area. Potential housing types may include townhomes and multi-family buildings. Redevelopment in the MR-3 zoning district will be complementary to the Veterans Memorial Park and consist of multi-family residential buildings. The overlay district will allow some flexibility for commercial or office space to be integrated into a residential building. Potential uses may include a restaurant, bar, coffee shop, meeting space, or banquet space. Commercial and office space uses should be complementary to the residential uses and park users. HigH-DENSiTY MULTi-FAMiLY PRECEDENT Development Standards A. Residential development shall include a minimum of two types of residential land uses that expand the variety of lifecycle housing options in the study area. B. The principal building heights shall be a minimum of 20 feet and up to a maximum of 55 feet or 5 stories, whichever is less. -Building heights shall be measured from the building site’s average ground level elevation. -Floors above the third floor shall be stepped back a minimum of 15 feet when adjacent to public streets and public land. Step backs may be adjusted depending on specific site conditions and building placements. C. A lot larger than two (2) acres is allowed to include a second building. -The two buildings shall be grouped into a single polygon to assess compliance with required setbacks. D. The maximum building coverage shall be 40%. E. The minimum front yard setback shall be 15 feet and the maximum shall be 25 feet. F. Existing trees shall be protected and preserved to the greatest degree possible. g. Pedestrian facilities shall be placed along the site’s perimeter to provide walking connections between the public street and public amenities such as, Veterans Memorial Park. H. Stormwater shall be managed onsite by using best management practices, such as raingardens, green roofs, and bio-infiltration swales to create aesthetically pleasing and useable public spaces or underground systems. i. Sites north of 66th Street shall plan internal traffic circulation to accommodate the potential for a north-south road (an approximate extension of Oakland Avenue) that would connect the sites to 66th Street. PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN22 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C-2) Development in the C-2 zoning district will need to be in compliance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The proposed overlay district includes some flexibility that will allow some residential uses with a commercial development when it is not the predominant use. Development Standards A. Residential uses are only allowed on upper floors of a building with permitted uses on the ground floor. B. Existing trees shall be protected and preserved to the greatest degree possible. C. Pedestrian facilities shall be placed along the site’s perimeter to provide walking connections between the public street and public amenities such as, Veterans Memorial Park. D. Sites north of 66th Street shall plan internal traffic circulation to accommodate the potential for a north-south road (an approximate extension of Oakland Avenue) that would connect the sites to 66th Street. E. Stormwater shall be managed onsite by using best management practices, such as raingardens, green roofs, and bio- infiltration swales to create aesthetically pleasing and useable public spaces or underground systems. F. Require a Bird Collision Reduction Plan as part of new or substantially new development applications.gENERAL COMMERCiAL PRECEDENT J. When adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park, the required rear and side yard setbacks shall prioritize greenspace and landscaping as a transition/buffer to the Park. K. A shadow study shall be required as part of the development review process to evaluate potential impacts of shadowing on adjacent properties, measured by the sun’s position at the time of the summer solstice. L. A minimum of one primary building entrance is required on each street façade and at least one building entrance every 75 feet of each street façade. M. Require a Bird Collision Reduction Plan as part of new or substantially new development applications. JUNE 2021 23 ATTACHMENT A - SURVEY 1 Portland and 66th Sub-area Study Survey Tell us about yourself: Answered: 102 Skipped: 5 I visit the study area to shop or do business. I work in the study area. I live in the study area as a renter. Other I live in the study area as a homeowner. I visit the study area to use Veterans … 0 20 40 60 I visit the study area to use Veterans Memorial Park.45 42.06% I live in the study area as a homeowner.42 39.25% Other 9 8.41% I live in the study area as a renter.4 3.74% I work in the study area.1 0.93% I visit the study area to shop or do business.1 0.93% If you responded "Other," please explain below: The word cloud requires at least 20 answers to show. Answers Count Percentage Response Count Answered: 7 Skipped: 100 This is the real gem in Richfield that would be left untouched fexcept for development in areas that ha ve not already been zoned commercial such as the Funeral home.. Keep some character in this small town city, PLEASE! 1 There are over 200 different birds that uses the park whether for migration or nesting. It already is a je wel as a nature habitat. Nature does not need improvement. Humans are the problem. 1 TEST - LANCE 1 Note: I live a block east of Veterans Park, which is close to the study area, but I'm not sure if it's consi dered part of the study area.. 1 My name is Donald Belkengren and I am the current president of the Honoring All Veterans Memorial, located just north of the Legion post 435 property. 1 Live next to study area 1 Legion Post member and Board Member of The Honoring All Veterans Memorial 1 0 Please select your age range: More than 65 years old Between 51 and 65 years old Between 36 and 50 years old Between 19 and 35 years old Under 18 years old 0 10 20 30 40 AnswersAnswers CountCount PercentagePercentage Answered: 106 Skipped: 1 Under 18 years old 0 0% Between 19 and 35 years old 25 23.36% Between 36 and 50 years old 27 25.23% Between 51 and 65 years old 34 31.78% More than 65 years old 20 18.69% What types of residential redevelopment should be explored within the study area? Assisted Living Other Senior Housing Apartments Townhomes Condos None 0 20 40 60 None 59 55.14% Condos 30 28.04% Townhomes 26 24.3% Apartments 24 22.43% Senior Housing 16 14.95% Other 16 14.95% AnswersAnswers CountCount PercentagePercentage Answered: 105 Skipped: 2 Assisted Living 10 9.35% If you responded "Other," what other types of residential redevelopment would you like to see in the st… The word cloud requires at least 20 answers to show. Veteran related housing... or if city can purchase then be city activities related such as Community Ce nter. 1 TEST - LANCE 1 Only across 66th from the park.1 None.1 NONE, Please save our park as a natural area!1 No residential 1 no development as this land was donated to keep it as open as public land! do you remember cutting down the oak trees? 1 Low-income housing!1 I would like to see the study area within Veteran's Park be planted with native plants to benefit wildlife and water quality in the park. 1 Disabled Veteran Housing 1 Development with NO reduction of natural areas. This is a prime spot for imprtant songbirds.1 Apartments or condos to house veterans who are low income or just getting started in careers after th eir military service. 1 Apartments must be multi use. It adds a lot and is really efficient use of space. I believe they promote pedestrian traffic as well. 67th and Portland would likely need lower speed limits or narrower street wi dth to promote slower speeds. 1 ResponseResponse CountCount Answered: 15 Skipped: 92 Anything but more high density housing. We have too much of that already in Richfield, and traffic is a lready bad on Portland. Why does the city refuse to listen to home owner concerns about high density low income housing? 1 55 plus 1 0 What types of commercial redevelopment should be explored within the study area? Hotel/Motel Office Space Fast Food or Convenience Food Pharmacy Automotive Services (Gas Station or Repair) Convenience Store Other Grocery Store Retail Coffee Shop None Taproom/Cocktail Room Restaurant 0 20 40 60 Restaurant 48 44.86% Taproom/Cocktail Room 46 42.99% None 42 39.25% Coffee Shop 40 37.38% Retail 25 23.36% AnswersAnswers CountCount PercentagePercentage Answered: 103 Skipped: 4 Grocery Store 20 18.69% Other 15 14.02% Convenience Store 11 10.28% Automotive Services (Gas Station or Repair)10 9.35% Pharmacy 9 8.41% Fast Food or Convenience Food 8 7.48% Office Space 8 7.48% Hotel/Motel 3 2.8% If you responded "Other," what other types of commercial redevelopment would you like to see in the … The word cloud requires at least 20 answers to show. TEST - LANCE 1 Reuse if the Legion for restaurant or coffee shop 1 Reestablish Richfield legion post 435 on the lower lever of building to face the Veterans Memorial on t he north side. 1 Only locally owned businesses!1 None. None at all. The business there should remain, as should the homes.1 NONE 1 Multipurpose apartments. See the Highlands Bridge redevelopment.1 Meeting Space 1 invest in ecological services provided by the park 1 ResponseResponse CountCount Answered: 15 Skipped: 92 If purchased , buyer provide space facing memorial for Legion activities (Meetings, Ceremonies, food and drinks 1 Development that does not disturb or reduce current natural areas and 4 stories or less to reduce imp act on songbirds and waterfowl. 1 Community Center/Rec Center with youth programming, with the Hockey arena and swimming pool st aying. Also, local businesses are always great, especially ones that represent Our diversity! Local Ro ots has been awesome, breweries bring in great revenue. 1 Community center 1 Brewpub, Find a space in Richfield for Lyn65 Restaurant!1 American Legion restaurant, bar and meeting rooms.1 0 Do you support mixed-use developments (e.g., housing with ground-level commercial) within the stud… Yes Neutral No Yes 35 32.71% Neutral 19 17.76% AnswersAnswers CountCount PercentagePercentage Answered: 99 Skipped: 8 No 45 42.06% Are there aspects of Veterans Memorial Park that you think could be improved? park walkingpathsarea Leave Nature people park. Naturalpicnic developmentspacebenches trails Improved green housing bike dog pathwildlifeparking area.waste stationmoney water Make nice trash additional amenities pool walk - / large Lighting alone. Portland treesfloating golfpartcommercial high paths. improved. open nature. community courts grills family buildings Veterans be. upkeep Christmas Tree boardwalk spaces traffic. circulation Lots color replaced Trailpathway Bridge provide Expanded added space. parks rink guests building. safety featuresawful improvement. density neighborhood. bikes areas bandshell marsh center entrance minigas live spend Improve compliment indoor biking signage Protecting programming protect it.focus city. areas. save destroy pedestrian maintaining alone! input makes Add Clean lakes build enjoy Fix 1 20 love one. replacing section lake niceryoung stay is!is? is.bit set kids. barelyrun 66th put lot base soft city Ave. is!! Full ? 1. 2. semi 3. lap St. Yes, would love to see a dog park, even a small one. Walking paths could use replacing and the path through the northern section of the lake (floating plastic) could be redone to be nicer like woodlark nat ure center. Volleyball courts near the water could attract more young people, and park grills and or pic nic benches could make for nice family outing spots 1 yes trails can be improved but this park should/must stay as is! please look up who donated this parce l!!! 1 Why not just leave the area as is? Further development of the area around the park will only disturb th e wildlife there through changing water levels and distribution, sunlight effects of tall buildings, and fre quent songbird and waterfowl deaths by hitting hundreds of windows. This is very upsetting. Please re consider. 1 Veterans Park is perfect as it is. Please leave it be.1 Upkeep of trails; stop Christmas tree sales.1 Trash needs to be picked up much more regularly. The boardwalk is in poor condition and has no han drails. The nature spaces should be preserved and cared for. 1 ResponseResponseResponseResponseResponse CountCountCountCountCount Traffic. The only way in and out of the park/pavilion is on Portland/64th. During peak times (Farmers Market Saturdays, Christmas Tree sales, etc..) this can be a bit congested. Perhaps an additional entr ance/exit? 1 Traffic circulation could be improved between the various amenities at the park. Consider linking the p arking lots between the picnic shelter and pool with an interior Parkway, but preserve the park charact er (very narrow roadway like Minneapolis’ parkways, unique pavement color, speed bumps, etc.) 1 The walking trails haven't been repaired or replaced in probably 20 yrs. The play area's replacement's weren't thought out very well. The original set up was more flexible and entertaining for kids. 1 The walking trail and pathway around the park. The bridge that goes through the brush area is unstabl e and people can barely use it to walk through the area. If the walking pathway going around towards the highway were improved then it would provide a larger area for people to walk or run around in the area. 1 the walking paths should be resurfaced and the playground could be expanded or another added in a different spot - its often quite busy. aside from that, people who go there go for nature and green spac e. Leave it untouched 1 The walking paths need to be repaved / replaced with more signage/maps of the parks throughout. Pa rking needs to be restricted at the Pool/Hockey Rink if a large shopping/living space is going in to rese rve it for the pool / hockey rink guests and not for residents and or guests of the residential building. A dditional lighting / other safety features should be added for individuals walking alone. 1 The round about on 66th and Portland is absolutely awful for pedestrians. It needs improvement. I am very concerned about putting a large housing development in the area will not help with congestion, pl us they generally are not visually appealing. I appreciate having low density housing in my neighborho od. 1 The paths are in very rough shape and should be resurfaced. I use it every day and it is not smooth fo r bikes or walking. I also think there are areas that could use more picnic benches and trees that provi de shade. 1 The park and nature area needs maintenance. It has been degraded by garbage, dog waste and gen eral abuse. Building the bandshell was a waste. 1 The only thing that I can think of is some sort of handrail/rope to hang onto when on the Floating walk way through the marsh area--similar to what Woodlake Nature Center has on their Floating Bridge 1 The bike path on Portland at the entrance to the mini golf parking needs work as it forces you to enter a lane of traffic. 1 The best part of living here is that it’s single family homes. Not townhomes or condos or apartments. T ake out all the center mediums put in a couple years ago. Remove the one way on Oakland. T&T is th e best hometown (Richfield motto) gas station perfectly located. If we wanted to live where there was a lot of commercial or high turnover rates we would move to Minneapolis. 1 TEST - LANCE 1 Spend some money on the park - improve paved walkways.Include amenities that compliment the par k like Indoor batting cages or other indoor recreation facility. More separation between walking and bik ing paths. 1 Signage of the trails and circulation could be improved. As it is there are often bikers on the walking p aths. Lighting and safety amenities could also be improved. 1 Restoring and protecting the natural resource base of the park. Providing soft programming so people understand the value of Nature in the city and strive to protect it. 1 Respect for the ecological value of the park rather than a focus on development to make money for th e city. Housing and commercial development can take place in other areas. 1 Repave walking/hiking paths to better accommodate bikes/roller blades.1 Protecting green spaces and nature 1 Please save park for walking, birding, and a natural habitat. Don't destroy it with more development. 1 Permanent trash containers near the "Honoring All Veterans Memorial" to help keep it respectfully cle an. 1 Pedestrian and bike access improvement on Portland Ave. Could use sports field and outdoor ice rin k. Alcohol allowed during events in pavilion. 1 Paths could use a new top coat 1 Not improved, leave it alone. We are running out of green space in Richfield. We need open green sp ace for migrating birds. 1 no 1 No bikes on the trails.1 More signage about the park and how it connects to other parks and trails would be helpful.1 Maintain the natural space; improvements to paths.1 Less commercialization, more focus on maintaining natural areas.1 Leave the park alone!1 Leave it alone! It's a little gem in the middle of the city. I doubt my input will mean anything. It seems t hat when asked for input, it makes no difference to the powers that be. Case in point, all the ridiculous roundabouts. 1 Leave it alone 1 Keep it natural 1 It would be nice to have some interpretive signs about the natural features of the park, such as the kin ds of trees and wildlife found there and what drainage the marsh is part of (that is, where the water co mes from and where it goes). Also it would be nice to have flower beds to add color to the park. 1 Instead, spend money on maintaining the existing features.1 Instead of development you should clean up the lakes and protect the park to continue to support the wildlife within it!!!! You have housing and shopping nearby so why would you destroy parkland??? Car e for what you have because once it is gone you cannot get it back!!! Do you want another Richfield L ake?? It is surrounded by shopping and housing and look how awful it is!! Full of trash and garbage--- UGLY!! 1 Improved, probably not. I realize Richfield would like to raise money through more people paying taxe s, but why cannot things be left alone ? The apartment complex near 66/Queen ruined the area. All of the “new” buildings weren’t designed to fit into the neighborhoods but rather a inexpensive cookie cutt er building. I realize I am most likely in the minority but it just makes me shake my head in shame. 1 Improve upkeep of walking paths and benches.1 I walk the park daily and think the paths could be improved. More rest areas to take in the wildlife. So me other things like a rose garden or open space is nice. The bandshell is a waste as it is not used an d an eye sore. Update the picnic area for people using it. (real bathrooms). Keep T and T as a gas sta tion is necessary for this area. Don't build a high rise. Lots of empty commercial space in the area alre ady. 1 I go to Veteran's park to enjoy nature. I would prefer to minimize additional amenities.1 I enjoy the many loops available. Lighting would be my number 1 improvement.1 Fix the walking and biking paths! Leave the Natural part of the park for nature.1 Answered: 61 Skipped: 46 Fix the leaking floating bridge. Clean up the lakes of trash. Enforce the pedestrian path as a path for p edestrians, not bikes. Leave the wildlife alone. 1 Do not build high density housing. It will ruin the park.1 Consider Vondlepark in Amsterdam as a prime example of a superb park. More trees for shade and h ammock usage, bocce courts and other places for families to gather. 1 Cleaning up the area where the Legion was 1 Bike repair station, e-car charging, community garden 1 Bike connections and paths 1 Benches upkeep... Community centet 1 Bathrooms 1 Add and upgrade benches and picnic tables.1 A safer boardwalk, more unpaved hiking trails, 9-hole disc golf course, grills and fire pits would be fun. Keep the mini golf and farmer’s market. Expanded Arts and Nature programming for kids and adults. More use of the amphitheater and the green space nearby. Bocce ball courts. Make it even more fun! Upgrades to benches and picnic spots. 1 A more connected entrance to nature. A gateway of sorts that would compliment the new developmen t and be welcoming to the park. 1 A bike repair station with vending unit of bicycle materials would be nice. Trail patrol by police. 1 1. There could be a few more waste receptacles along the walking paths and I think that free dog was te bag dispensers would encourage more people to pick up after their dog. From our experience, a go od portion of the park users (including ourselves) are dog walkers that live in the neighborhood. 2. Th e large parking area behind the American Legion seems like wasted, unused space. It is always empt y save for a parked semi truck or other random vehicles. 3. My wife is a lifelong swimmer and she thin ks that the pool could open for lap swimming in the mornings during the summer and that might bring extra business and community engagement. Currently she drives to St. Paul every morning to swim in stead. 1 0 What are your top three (3) redevelopment concerns for the Study Area? Lighting Building Façade (Materials) Parking Landscaping Other Surface Water Runoff Noise Building Height Traffic Type of Development (e.g., apartments… Size of Development (e.g., number of … Building Proximity to Veterans Memorial… 0 20 40 60 Building Proximity to Veterans Memorial Park 56 52.34% Size of Development (e.g., number of housing units)46 42.99% Type of Development (e.g., apartments, condos, or townhome s) 41 38.32% Traffic 33 30.84% Building Height 30 28.04% Noise 25 23.36% Surface Water Runoff 24 22.43% Other 14 13.08% Landscaping 13 12.15% Parking 13 12.15% Building Façade (Materials)12 11.21% Lighting 12 11.21% Answers Count Percentage Answered: 103 Skipped: 4 If you responded "Other," what else concerns you about redevelopment in the study area? The word cloud requires at least 20 answers to show. Answered: 13 Skipped: 94 You have one of the best wildlife areas in the metro 1 The impact on plant and animal life in the park.1 TEST - LANCE 1 Should be Park and or Veteran related aspects to design.1 Potential for vandalism at the Honoring All Veterans Memorial 1 Maintaining the green areas of the park. It's such a nice natural area and would be nice to keep it that way. 1 Loss of businesses and community spaces 1 Losing nature.1 I don’t want to make more room for cars and e away from biking a walking 1 I am concerned about all of the above. You should not limit it to 3.1 Environmental impact/sustainability in addition to water runoff 1 disturbance, noise and pollution from construction 1 Add underground parking or plenty of pervious space. Surface water runoff shouldn’t be an issue, ther e are regulations that must be met. There’s an added safety concern with increased population. 1 0 What matters most to you when considering redevelopment directly adjacent to Veterans Memorial Par… Response Count park areaspace people park. Veterans development Richfieldwildlife naturalbuildings community City area. housing Green density traffic habitat concerned high great preserving urban water Portland livefamily residential parkingbuilding make housing. noise lot 66th memorial design apartments birds Nature Maintaining areas Legion beauty remain quiet Richfield. low lower income retail property accessible love leave important Lake home wildlife. moved development. Part single units existing commercial care pollution families feel - living pool redevelopment. Honoring ruining space. homes Memorial. Keeping trees environmental impact neighborhood big increasedcurrent townhomes pedestrian matters supports vet's Wood destroy park's idea pass large developing respect hope increasecreate residents. preserved activity areas. Center local options coffee enjoy frequently Moving potential grow way. adjacent integrate height long peaceful is. exist wild things needed. higher foot traffic. options. move forward Lyndale Avenue support end Street France Avenue.picnic valuable walk Veteran's drive ..it. money on. gem leftEast bike loss close fit Post 30 62350 435 1000 shed dog. sort de # drink 50th ties it’s life heat & 1. 2. 3. 4. 1st ice disc iTacoI’d fit. meet R. Wildlife 1 Why? Leave it alone.1 What matters most is the wellbeing of the many insects, birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and pl ants that rely on this park as a habitat refuge in an urban area. The marsh and ecosystem it supports clean our water and air. 1 Welfare of wildlife, too many people, park becoming unsafe.1 Vet's Park is an important wildlife corridor that supports Wood Lake and the nature in vet's Park needs protection. Also I am concerned about our water source and the water that will leave the park via Minn ehaha Water shed district. 1 Veterans Park is home to many varieties of birds and other wildlife. It would be shameful to hurt that p opulation. 1 Traffic; namely on Portland (I live off of Portland).1 To not do anything that would take away from the park or destroy the habitat of the wildlife there 1 To me, maintaining Veterans Park's nature areas around Legion Lake and the walking paths is most i mportant. Before we moved here we had no idea what a wonderful park this was. There is outstandin g natural beauty and a wide array of wildlife that inhabit or pass through the park. It is frequented by many birdwatchers and nature enthusiasts--I pass them almost daily on walks with my dog. I would be disappointed if the park became some sort of de facto, unappreciated backyard for a large high densit y housing development. I am all for developing the underutilized land along the park's southwest corn er, but it should be done with respect to maintaining the essence and natural beauty of the park. 1 ResponseResponseResponseResponseResponseResponseResponseResponse CountCountCountCountCountCountCountCount This part of the community I would hope would remain as many single family units or redeveloped sa me # units for existing housing. I am concerned that the increase in commercial and residential withou t parking will create headaches for residents. We bought knowing the area as a quiet single family are a. 1 This park needs to be preserved as a space for birders, walkers and people seeking a quiet natural sp ace away from the noise and activity of the playground areas. Unlike Wood Lake Nature Center, Vets Park has not received the care and maintenance on a year-t0-year basis to preserve it as a destinatio n. I am concerned if there is large-scale development this park will become a haven for after-hours de structive activity and drug use, and will no longer be a safe place for those who visit. That would be a shame. 1 This is important habitat for wildlife, especially songbirds and waterfowl. I live in Richfield and do not want to lose any of this natural area and do not want light pollution into the park. Any building would n eed fritted glass to avoid songbird deaths. 1 This area of the city needs some revitalization. It would be great to have small, local options to dine, g et coffee and or a drink that would compliment the area. We enjoy this park immensely as a family an d I frequently say it is the main thing I have enjoyed about relocating to Richfield. You have a lot of yo ung families moving in, and many because they were priced out of the city. I know we are here now a nd not sure about staying because we miss our urban neighborhoods. Richfield has a lot of potential t o grow in a unique way. 1 The upsetting of the adjacent wetlands, pools, woods, and all of the accompanying wildlife.1 The two I think of first is how the buildings will integrate into the surrounding park areas. Low height (n ot more than three stories) and ample green space would go a long way. The park already suffers by having it's northern edge defined by Hwy 62, being "surrounded" by high buildings that utilize every sq uare inch of surface area for building and parking lot would really harm the feel of the park. 1 The park is peaceful the way it is. There needs to be no new buildings. It is already a regional destinat ion and people will come no matter what buildings do or don't exist nearby. 1 The area should remain wild with no encroachment. Veterans park is a jewel. One of the nicest things about Richfield. More housing is not needed. 1 The addition of higher density housing leads to heavier foot and vehicle traffic. With lower income den ser housing comes crime. Look to the Hub for retail, brewery, or elevated food options. 1 That you are considering high density low income housing. PLEASE STOP!!!! I know you will ignore t hese comments and move forward. Just like the city moved forward with all of those ridiculous rounda bouts down Lyndale avenue, tearing down property where Lyn65 is for more high density housing. Cit y needs to support higher end places like Lyn65. Richfield has become a restaurant desert and magn et for high density low income housing. Look at 66th street and Penn - France avenue. Now you want to extend all that density and traffic all the way to Portland and beyond? This is the last straw and I'm moving. After living here for 30 years. There are no "engagement opportunities" - that is a complete jo ke. 1 That there is a building that provides more rental space for lower income people and that traffic is able to get around the area seamlessly without much interruption. That the buildings are accessible to thos e with disabilities. That there is free meeting space offered in the area for groups that would like to me et. That it does not interrupt traffic on Portland Avenue. Would like to keep the pool and other activitie s that the community uses for family activities. Enough parking should still be available after redevelo pment. The park should remain accessible to the community and the picnic area should still remain op erable. 1 That the park and the wildlife are not negatively affected.1 That the city leaders are trying to use such a valuable asset not only to Richfield but also to our neigh bors as a conduit to make Richfield less of a community and more of a city.. Go for a walk in Veteran's Park.. have a picnic by the Farmer's market, play miniature golf, seek the serenity of the war memoria l.. then go for a drive to 50th and France and see what crammed development can do .. Don't do this t o our community! 1 That promises (even "we'll do our best to make that happen") get upheld with accountability from local government. 1 That no development occurs and the economic value of the park be considered.1 that it ties in with and does not over shadow the park 1 That it integrate well with the park, not be an eyesore 1 that it adds to the park and does not take away from it. This means are there things to do or see or sp end your money at when you are done visiting the park or vice versa to go visit the park after you hav e done , seen, or spent money at you want to relax and take in the out doors at Veterans Memorial Pa rk 1 That development not detract from thriving wildlife in the area.1 That design does not encroach upon the Honoring All Veterans Memorial 1 TEST - LANCE 1 Space , it’s nice to be able to see 1000 yards in all directions without something being taller than a ho me. 1 Ruining green space. Ruining the character of this town. Eliminating precious single-family homes, rui ning the natural area. I.e., don't do those things. 1 Richfield has plenty of unused retail space and potential areas for redevelopment. It makes better sen se to focus on filling this up, prior to taking this project on. 1 Richfield has a gem of a park with Veterans Memorial. I think the ability to get away from city life is po ssible in the park the way it is. We didn't need the pavilion (water under the bridge now). And we don't need a bunch of apartments looking down at the park. So what matters most to me is keeping the par k a area with trees, water and serenity. I know we have airport noise, but that is most of Richfield. KE EP IT THE WAY IT IS!! 1 Preserving what green space Richfield has left for the health of its citizens. The environmental impact of the project. The amount this development would contribute to climate change. 1 Preserving the natural space as much as possible. Urban trees canopy create innumerable benefits in cluding fiscal. Studies show kids do better in school when they have access to green spaces. If we wa nt to protect our urban habitat we have to de-commodify every stretch of green space. You should con sider expanding the tree canopy into the lawn along 66th to the east of the folly (AKA bandshell). Area s with more trees correlates to people with improve breathing and lung health, improved water manag ement, lower urban heat island. 1 Preserving the largely natural character of the park while allowing for reasonable residential and/or co mmercial development. I'd prefer that any development have landscaping that would be appropriate f or its location next to the park. 1 Preserving the integrity of the park.1 Preserving quiet residential neighborhood, preserving natural aspects of the Park 1 Pollution and trash. Inherently will be many more people in direct contact with the area, that may or m ay not care about preserving the park. Almost certainly will end up with way more litter. 1 Personal safety and preservation of wild spaces within the park.1 Parking and vandalism at the Honoring All Veterans Memorial.1 Park overuse.1 not overpopulating the area. Too many people in the park, to much traffic. The pool is already often ve ry busy which would only be more so. We came to Richfield to live in the "Urban Hometown." I don't w ant big buildings and tons more people and more crowding of the park. it will also detract from the bea uty of the area. 1 Not over crowding the area with people and traffic and maintaining the urban home town feel.1 No more apartment buildings 1 Needs to make area Lively and easy to bike and walk around 1 Moving Richfield forward with useful amenities that will bring in new residents and serve future/young er residents. As a resident who moved to Richfield from Minneapolis, I still find myself heading back in to the city for many bars/restaurants, coffee shops and tap rooms. 1 more housing is needed to make overall housing more affordable.1 Minimize impacts to the park (follow NEPA/MEPA & MPCA).1 Maintaining the desire for residents to want to go to the park with a large multi-story residential compl ex in the middle of it. 1. Ensuring parking restrictions to guests of the pool/hockey rink without having paid lots. 2. The safety of the park 3. The cleanliness / upkeep of the park 4. Bringing in the right kind of commercial businesses. 1 Loss of habitat for existing wildlife. Noise and trash!!1 loss of green space, increased foot traffic, increased litter.1 Losing green space, traffic volume, noise, people losing their homes.1 Less concerned about height or density of buildings; up to 4-5 stories would be fine as long as the buil dings are up against Portland, and lower closer to the actively used parts of the park. Most important i s quality architecture and building materials, timeless design built to last and blends well with surroun dings. 1 Keeping our city accessible and diverse, environmental sustainability, increasing options for shopping, dining and socializing 1 Keeping crime low, congestion, the empty buildings that need addressing already in the neighborhoo d. The old Rainbow, old Payless, the random empty structures on 66th and 1st need development bef ore this area of Richfield. I am really opposed to having high density housing so close to my house. It makes my neighborhood feel less intimate and more suburban. 1 Keep the feel of an open community park. Keep the pool and ice arena, we love them!!!1 Keep as park .. no 350 units 1 It would be great to have an “upgrade” for families, as we already use veterans park frequently. We w ould love to get more use out of the space without compromising the environment. Rosland park in Ed ina made upgrades to modernize and it gets a lot of use with a great Art Center as well and disc golf. Very family-friendly is the theme, so if residential is considered, make sure it would work for the moder n family (condos, and not too many). The park is a gem in our city, so the least amount of environmen tal impact is best. Something that captures the flair of our diverse town would be incredible! 1 It takes the beauty of veterans park away from the general public. I don't want to drive down Portland or 66th and see buildings, I want to see the park. 1 It should not intrude on the park or block views of the park for nearby homeowners.1 It should NOT be developed.1 It should be strictly put up for a vote by the citizens. No intervention by City Council and developers/co ntractors. 1 It should be kept natural. No multi unit housing.1 It needs to be done with the current community in mind. I think changing out old apartments for nicer apartments or townhomes is great, but if these butt up against single family homes, design it so that t he privacy of those homes are protected. I actually like the idea of townhomes replacing some of the c urrent smaller apartments, as townhomes make a better transition from residential. Also, consider curr ent community favorite businesses. My husband and I go to iTaco (grocery) frequently for specialty et hnic groceries. I’d love to see more businesses like restaurants and breweries move in, but care need s to be given in how to transition from residential to commercial. 1 It need to fit the park environment. Throwing in retail or housing doesn’t fit. Choose amenities that fit with parks or recreation. 1 It is a valuable area because it is a natural habitat for many birds and animals. This value needs to be preserved 1 It is a natural , peaceful place. Don't destroy wildlife by building big housing units.1 Influx of too many people causing park and facilities to be overcrowded and noisy. I like the wildlife at the park and would hate to see it unduly disturbed! 1 Improving on the areas ability to be a community resource and improving equitable growth of living op tions. 1 I'm incredibly concerned about developers coming in from outside our community and gentrifying the area. East Richfield has many low-income families and renters and I worry that rent will increase in th e area to match the high rents associated with new development. Also I think new buildings should try and blend in with community buildings that already exist in the area. I'm so tired of feeling like I don't b elong in my neighborhood because I can't afford to live in the fancy modern architecture that redevelo pers love (like what's happening with the 66th and Lyndale redevelopment. 1 I'm concerned that it will be replaced with an auto-oriented building design, when it's location next to t he park is ripe for pedestrian and bike focused infrastructure 1 I would like to see the Legion post 435 be a big part of the development of the property that the legion now stands on. It would be a great amenity to have it facing the "Honoring All Veteran Memorial" wher e veterans and visitors can relate to both. The memorial will continue to grow beyond my lifetime and would be a great legacy to leave behind a statement of honor to those who served. 1 I would like to see multi-use development with ground-level commercial. Pedestrian friendly, green sp ace, connection to the park, public establishments. 1 I go to Veteran's park to enjoy nature. I do not want the wildlife to be detrimentally affected by more p eople and noise. 1 I don't support any redevelpment the park need to be left alone It doesnt need to be ruined for more r etail we don't need or apartments 1 I don’t want my property value to go down. Even stArting this project has possibly affected my propert y value. People might not want to buy my home if they know it is slated to be torn down in the near fut ure. I’m pissed!! 1 I do not want a thousand more people living close to the park. Part of the charm of the area is that it's not super crowded all the time, and I wouldn't want a lot more people around. 1 I am really hoping that the space is used to maximize development but also ensuring that there is a g ood mix of businesses and apartments/condos. It would be great for this area to see more pedestrian friendly opportunities to shop, eat, and recreate easily 1 Answered: 87 Skipped: 20 I am on board of The Honoring All Veterans Memorial located in Veterans Park, north of the proposed development site. Whatever future decisions are made should consider the proximity to an existing m emorial that deserves respect for personal quiet reflection. I would hope the planners would consider developing the space on ground floor as a viewable and easily accessible area to the Memorial. It wo uld be ideal if the American Legion Post is given first option to occupy that ground floor space. Adequ ate parking immediately adjacent to the handicap sidewalk entrance is a necessity, especially when w e conduct Veterans holiday events throughout the year. The HAVM Board members would be happy t o meet with the City Planners if needed. Thank you for this survey. Respectfully submitted, Brian R. P eterson. 1 Green space incorporated into use of land.1 For development NOT IN the park I would be concerned about increased traffic since I live on Portlan d Avenue and 73rd Street 1 Flow of traffic, proper design time, public space to attract people.1 Destruction of natural habitat, noise pollution, over use 1 construction timeframe/level of interruption 1 Avoiding negative impact on birds and other animals that live, nest, and migrate through the park 1 0 What do you like about the precedent development examples? Please explain. parkarea developmentparking buildingsidea spacenice examples Richfield housing building apartmentsarea. living built underground smaller 66th Legion pedestrian landscaping NOTHING.restaurant people residents green spaces urban mixed sideCommunity store good easily Grand single love feel include 3 Nothing! / scalestorytaller Centennial south proposed - connections Apple senior room group Icelevel1 4 50 435 amenities (pool playground space) interiorstreets developments (less stories) Significant lighting exteriorimmediately (like give work ideas site bad clear care TEST NA (I find #34 @ #36 lot mix live in.I’d is. VFW " & West. Nothing!2 Nothing 2 Underground parking for residents, their own private amenities (pool / playground / green space), inter ior streets, smaller scale developments (less stories), Significant lighting of exterior spaces for safety. 1 They all look nice but the 4 story or taller buildings immediately adjacent to a park (like at Centennial Lakes) give it a feeling of an urban manmade park that just doesn't work for Veteran's. So I like those i deas and some mixed use on the south side of 66th but on the Legion site or the Funeral Home if it ev er redevelops I think going taller than 3 stories would be a really bad idea, possibly even capping it at two. 1 The proposals are not clear on the website of what it will mean. How many buildings are being propos ed, what height, how many units, etc.? Please update us with more info. 1 The examples seem to be unnecessary when considering all of the spaces within Richfield that could use much care and attention. 1 That they are not in Richfield 1 TEST - LANCE 1 Pedestrian connections and landscaping are important. Preserve as many mature trees as possible.1 Nothing. Leave it alone.1 Nothing. If it becomes housing it will undoubtedly be unaffordable for the average citizen.1 nothing no changes are needed 1 Not sure.1 Not a damn thing.1 None!!!1 NONE of it 1 No development would be better for nature.1 Nature..recreational opportunities.. Wildlife..birds..1 NA (I haven't beena ble to find those, sorry).1 Looking at examples #34 Gabella @ parks development in Apple Valley and #36 Ecumen Seasons S enior Apartment in Apple Valley. I would like to see no more than a building with a maximum of four flo ors with the lower floor being for Legion post 435 and business that would help the community with st ore fronts that faced Portland Ave. Parking should be all around the building with underground parking for the residents of any apartments. This would not crowd the parking lot for the visitors to the Memori al Park or the veterans memorial and have plenty of room for the shoppers of the retail businesses. 1 I would prefer the smaller, shorter buildings.1 I would like the area to be accessible for pedestrians and bikers and attract a diverse group of residen ts. 1 I really like the Henley apartments and Centennial Lakes examples because they offer a good mix of r esidential and office/business development while still including natural elements and connecting easil y to the surrounding area. I also enjoy the Excelsior and Grand example since it connects easily to sur rounding parks and provides more opportunities for individuals to live in the area instead of single resi dential spaces. 1 I really don't, but realize it is inevitable.1 I love the idea of bringing more businesses to the area. I do not like the idea of condos and apartment s. One reason we moved to this area was for the more urban feel and to be out of the cities. Adding al l these medium and heavy size living complexes is not helping with the urban feel. What Richfield nee ds is grocery stores, restaurant options and shopping options. 1 I love that we're hoping to bring more new families and residents to Richfield with the increase in hous ing available. 1 I liked the connection of living to green space in a number of the examples. The variety of living option s was nice as well. 1 I like upgrading infrastructure.1 I like the penn and Coventry townhomes for their modern appeal and private entrances. These would make good transitions from single family homes to larger apartments or businesses. I like sienna apar tments for its underground parking that allows for more green space and landscaping above. I like the mixed use of excelsior and grand and would love to see a coffee shop, ice cream parlor, restaurant, or brewery move in. For high density to replace the old legion building, I like the look of the lakes, with its asymmetric modern design. All of the examples with gabled roofs look outdated and out of touch. Ric hfield already has too many senior living communities. I’d like to see more modern buildings that attra ct young professionals and young families 1 I like smaller scale up against the park. The 3 story buildings I think are best. I think mixed use with th e ground level being retail/food/drink would also be nice. Would be nice for having a day out at the par k where you can easily stop off for a snack or whatever. 1 I like landscaping that elevates the curb appeal of the neighborhood. I also like pedestrian and bicycle connections. 1 I like 66th street the way it is with single family homes and the existing apartments along with a few s mall businesses. 1 I don't understand the amount of "development" you are talking about..however, the recent developm ent on the east side (cedar Avenue) certainly has more Police reports now than any other part of out c ommunity.. what will keep that from spreading to new development in the Veteran Park area.. 1 I don't like them 1 I don't like the idea of anything taking the place of the existing Pool, Ice Arena or land where the Band Shelter just was built, or where the picnic area/playground area is. I do like the idea of something mor e useful to everyone being in the VFW and Morris Nielson area (if they are both being sold?) such as a grocery store and restaurant. I feel the same for the area right across the street on 66th--that I woul d be open to low level construction that is useful to the whole community. I've heard the idea of a larg er Community Center being built here, which I feel would be perfect use of this area on the corner! 1 I don't can't say I like any of the precedent development example. We have plenty of multi unit housin g space in Richfield. Look at what is being built across from Target. 1 I do not want development in the park.1 I do like multiuse development, and I think the area could benefit from some higher density use that w ould promote a more pedestrian friendly use. 1 I believe the right areas are being explored, but please be sure that we don’t compromise too much of the park spaces by building nearby. It’s already got a great blueprint for a community-based, centraliz ed hub for recreation. Businesses should complement that vibe/aesthetic. 1 I am open to the type of building that is built in the area. If housing units are proposed for the corner of Veterans Memorial Park then it should include a public space like a restaurant, space that people can rent like the American Legion has. One of the other corners on Portland Ave and 66th street can inclu de a gas station or convenience store and another corner can include a restaurant or bar. This would make the area more vibrant. It would be nice for some of the buildings to have flowers and a tree in fr ont of it for decoration and enough lighting. It would be nice to have a free meeting space if people wa nt to book a room for up to 50 people - a place with either a couple of tables and stackable chairs or ju st chairs, etc. 1 Answered: 50 Skipped: 57 High quality construction built by local construction workers to maximize the benefits to the surroundin g communitites. 1 Don't like any of them. Inappropriate for Vets Park area.1 Consider the Chamberlain apartments, there are multiple cars and traffic constantly flowing into and o ut of the area. We used to go on walks here but with all the traffic it’s becoming less safe. This is what I fear for this development. 1 Community space.1 Basically nothing. At least the "improvements " seem to be on the other side of 66th.1 Again I'm very concerned about the size of housing and how that will affect the pond/wildlife and cong estion of having more people living so close by. Turning onto Portland 1 block south of 66th already fe els dangerous and if often very difficult for pedestrians. 1 Absolutely NOTHING. It will probably lead to crime in the park as well.1 **In all honesty, I despise the look of most of the examples. There is an epidemic of horrible cookie-cu tter design elements in so many new developments. Please, no orange! My favorite examples are Exc elsior & Grand, The Edgewater, and Parkway West. These buildings blend in to the surrounding area well and don't look so "replicated". Small extra investment in aesthetics could have lasting positive eff ects for the city. I think that a group of smaller buildings would look more like a neighborhood than a m ega-structure that envelops all the new housing. Natural landscaping is a plus. As with any walkable p ark, I think pedestrian connections are definitely important. I'm sure ample parking could be accomplis hed from a good underground parking space/ramp if this will be a large development. 1 0 How would you characterize a sustainable development? developmentgreen spacesustainable parkwater materials energy built future space.parking communityfriendly solar pavement means areas building Richfield residents buildings. environment good adds mixed public Housing environmentally minimal increase stand TEST ecological area - increasing infrastructure servicessurrounding naturalLeaving generations end idea Leave resources opportunities change environmental views rent % increases year Buildings compost ways lots levels traffic noise character neighborhood. citizens existing eyesore commercial properties access community. preserves long term pedestrian/bike storm tax power technology habitat 20 quality time paired innovation etc. Thriving LANCE related match. don’t add funds schools plop 80-120 unit (like hoe idea. Stop pave inch folks put top (esp.high all. Tear Vets #1 past pays baseuse.(or out)lot gas Well built with quality architecture that will stand the test of time, paired with ecological innovation in st ormwater, solar, less pavement area, etc. 1 Unnecessary!1 Thriving of wildlife!1 the one that is not built 1 TEST - LANCE 1 Sustainable means increasing infrastructure and related services to match. Developers don’t add fund s for schools, sewer, water and roads when they plop down 80-120 unit apartments. Sustainable also means not adversely effecting the surrounding areas with lighting and adverse natural conditions (like sun). 1 sustainable is leaving everything hoe it his so the park isnt ruined for other generations 1 Sustainable development means building with future generations of Richfield residents in mind. I kno w that I am just one voice. At the end of the day what matters most is getting a collective idea of what this neighborhood/community needs, for both now and in the future, and pursuing that idea. 1 Sustainable development includes choosing not to further commercially develop some areas, focusing instead on preserving and increasing their ecological value. 1 Stop developing and leave some green space. Do you really need to pave every square inch of Richfi eld? 1 ResponseResponseResponseResponse CountCountCountCount Something that used sustainable resources and techniques in construction and design (GREEN)1 Something that has opportunities to grow and change with the times as it ages 1 Something small and the environmental aspects of the park taken into consideration.1 Ridiculous and unnecessary.1 Retains balance of green space and people. Saves trees. Doesn't block views of the park Doesn't thre aten wildlife 1 Rent control and placing limits on the % increases in rent year over year, including increases between new tenants. New buildings should have requirements for % of reused/recycled materials and folks sh ould put solar on top of the buildings. We should try and have rainwater reclamation built into the land scaping. Also, we need municipal compost, both in the area, and across Richfield. I think we should al so try and find ways to ensure that there's both enough parking, but that we aren't wasting space by h aving parking lots take up so much space, so maybe underground parking garages (esp. for the high density) and an increased prioritization of connecting people with metro transit. 1 One that would not generate unreasonable levels of traffic and noise or fundamentally change the cha racter of the general neighborhood. 1 One that sustains nature and not destroy it for “progress”.1 One that does not take away green space.1 One that allows for a cohesive environment for new opportunities without harming the good things tha t were there before the development began. Safety to citizens is a critical component to any developm ent these days. 1 One that adds to the vibrancy of the community but does not intrude too much upon existing green ar eas and wildlife. 1 Not knowledgeable enough.1 not allowed 1 No further development 1 No development at all.1 More single homes that are larger than the typical rambler here. Restaurants and Brew Pubs. Tear do wn the Hub instead of ruining Vets park. That place is an eyesore and should be #1 priority for Richfiel d to address 1 Mixed use, retail and commercial public space on the lowest levels and mixed use housing above. So me lower income housing, mixed with higher end properties to take advantage of the surrounding pro perties, views, access to "things of interest" and something that adds to the community. 1 Meets the needs of the community without depleting or degrading natural resources 1 Leaving green space undisturbed where it belongs.1 Leave it alone.1 Keep it as park..no development since all houses were removed in past along Portland 1 It preserves the character of the park environment, above all, and does not invite lots of more vehicula r traffic. 1 It doesn’t take more than it gives back. Weather it be compost, reusable energy, pervious pavement, r euse rain roof water. 1 I see sustainable development as green spaces. In an economic sense I see it as developments that offer continuous long term funding or services to the immediate community. 1 I guess I don't really understand the use of the word 'sustainable' here? Sustainable by whom?1 Housing that is and will remain affordable for Richfield residents as well as businesses/office space th at is relevant to our communities current and future needs. 1 Have no idea what this means?1 Green infrastructure (green space, plants, pedestrian/bike friendly) storm water friendly pavement, en ergy efficient building. 1 Good thought of use of space and materials used in the space.1 generates enough tax revenue to cover public lifecycle expenses - see StrongTowns.1 Fits in with my neighborhood.1 environmentally friendly, uses solar power and green technology , has minimal long term impact on th e park, the contractor pays the workers a decent and fair wage and union labor is used. 1 Development that would serve the community without being an eyesore down the road 20 years. One that would sustain a tax base far into the future with both the commercial and residential use. 1 development that is actually wanted by the citizens of the city 1 Answered: 53 Skipped: 54 Developement that balances habitat preservation and improvement with racial justice and sustainable growth. Seeing green space and habitat as an urban good versus paved development. 1 Carbon neutral, pedestrian/bike friendly, minimal traffic increase, minimal noise increase, increase (or at least no loss) in green spaceI 1 Buildings built to last with modern energy usage and environmentally friendly materials while protectin g the park land. 1 Building into brown space and not into green space.1 Ample parking, amenities for residents, access to public transportation.1 Adequate green space, storm water management 1 A sustainable development to me is a development that is thoughtful and conscious of the materials b eing used but also thinking about using green technology to power these new buildings. In addition, th inking of rooftop gardens could be an interesting concept. In addition, being mindful to limit the amoun t of runoff is important. 1 A development that successfully considers its environmental, energy, cultural, and community impacts and finds ways to fit in (and not stand out) to the existing (environment, energy, culture, community) 1 A development that preserves the greenspace around it and adds some additional trees or flowers on the property around the buildings. It should allow for the containment of water and allow water runoff i n the right direction from heavy rains and snow melt. It should not emit a lot of gas into the air and sho uld be insulated properly. Something that does not pollute the environment to a large extent and can h elp curtail climate change. The use of the right building materials to make it more environmentally frie ndly. 1 0 Please provide any other comments you may have about potential redevelopment throughout the stud… park area communityRichfield city traffic housing people park. 66th buildapartments love places space veterans projectAdding it. natural area. retail buildings GREEN businessesfeellive Don’t small walk make good street homes Portland city.leaveland redevelopment Richfield. important Legiondevelopment living residential move bring placecommunity. SPACES adjacenthouse Pool parking options years wildlife quiet sense making Lake center made commercial ruin lot makes street. - Vet's hub here.high building idea immediately single family hope 2hard citizens talkneighborice memorial close develop change north Veteran's Park! resident property view peace bird bike asset improved stronger plan character species Vets etc. ago wanted story folks built home great Families includeadditionaltax incomeplayexperience nature Ave. Ave enjoy stores it’s alone. local run I’d big 3 4 25 6833 pressed find this. favor Serveinterestsagenda. rink fun stay all! Bill add in. turn fly bit is. facelift safe Ties fable path thing NE base baby Im / You would be hard pressed to find citizens who live in Richfield who actually want this. I have yet to ta lk to one neighbor who is in favor of it. Serve the interests of the citizens of the city, not your own agen da. 1 With the pool, ice rink and memorial being so close to eachother, I wonder about parking and traffic co ngestion entering/exiting the proposed site. 1 Why develop a natural area. Plenty of options to change things on Penn north of 66th.1 We need pedestrian crossing lights at 66th and Portland ASAP 1 We don’t really have many bars/breweries in the area and I think it would be a fun way to build comm unity after the pandemic ends! 1 Veteran's park needs to stay a park! no housing or retail development! please call and let me know w hen I can talk in front of you all! 612-300-7148 thank you Bill resident for over 25 years and love the p ark and know how this property was donated! 1 Veteran's Park is one of the few places where one can view wildlife and have a small space for peace and quiet in the city. Leave it alone!! 1 Veterans park is a jewel and should be preserved. It is highly used by the community and by people o utside the comunity who come to bird, mini-golf, bike or walk the trails. Seeing this space as an asset to be improved and protected is a stronger long-term goal than paving it over. 1 This plan does not seem to make logical sense when there are several unused and terrible looking bu ildings and land available for redevelopment within Richfield. Please consider cleaning those up and making good use of those first. 1 ResponseResponseResponseResponseResponseResponse CountCountCountCountCountCount This park is vitally important to birds and bird watchers from far and wide. It provides a rare confluenc e of low-impact human activity and nature. Please do not let its unique relaxing, natural character be d iminished. For example, the green space between Legion Lake and 66th Street should not, under any circumstances, have any structures add to it. It is very important for the sanity of city dwellers to have such scenes available to look at and/or walk in. Natural species must be protected. There are many ot her places in Richfield where development or redevelopment can happen. Vets Park should be disturb ed as little as possible. If new multifamily housing is desired, let it be restricted to lots in the area that already have aging apartments on them or the veterans center, etc. 1 This is off topic probably, but years ago Richfield wanted to build multi story buildings to get older folk s out of their homes to free up homes for younger people. I f you look at what is being built by the Tar get store.. number one anyone living in a residential home probably can't afford the cost of thee place s and secondly they are multilevel. Now I don't think people are looking to move out of their one story homes and into something they have to go up and down 3 stories..Just saying. 1 This is a great area for families and kids, and I don't want it to turn into something massive. It should maintain its character whatever is done. 1 There should be long hard decisions made with thoughts not only of gain that leaders think may come from development in this area but also of the loss there can be to those who use the park as it is now.. Not only the people but all the natural plant and animal species that are affected with development.. P LEASE DO A LITTLE GREEN THINKING!!! It's not all about $$$$ 1 The redevelopment ideas are a good opportunity to revamp this area of Richfield and modernize it. it should include a good mix of residential, commercial and recreational that can bring additional tax doll ars to Richfield. 1 The project seems to value the land as measured in dollars. Of course, more taxable income for the ci ty would follow. Please consider the value this land adds to our community that is immeasurable. Chil dren use that area to fly kites. Play catch with their parents. Go sledding in the winter. Families bring b lankets and picnic out there. People in our community go to the park to experience a bit of nature and to try to get away from the city. Looming buildings would ruin that. Adding a giant parking lot next to th e lake would ruin that. You're forgetting what the park is already giving to us. It's a place to exercise a nd breathe fresh air. Don't forget to value what makes a community a community. 1 The park is peaceful the way it is. Larger buildings along 66th Street would detract from the beauty an d peace of the park. It is already a regional destination and people already come here without adding a denser population. If any development is done, 66th Street from 12th Ave. to Cedar Ave. could inste ad use a facelift with so many small businesses along the street. 1 Thank you for allowing us to have input. I wish the community center project would still happen, as I fe el strongly that it would bring more use to the park and build a stronger community for our families. If t here is need for more input, I am happy to participate in other forums: Aric Bieganek 6833 2nd Ave S 7636004998 1 TEST - LANCE 1 Stop!!!! You are tearing this city up enough!!1 Slower traffic, improved transit, and better pedestrian/bike infrastructure on Portland Ave will be essen tial to making the area safe and accessible for all. 1 Please stop devaluing our natural spaces in East Richfield. Just because more people of color live in t his half of the city does not make our green spaces less important or valuable. Do not allow greed to f urther imperil the ecosystem at the park. Clean water and clean air are priceless and critical for the he alth and wellbeing of all residents. 1 Please listen to those who do not wish this area developed any further.1 Please listen to homeowners 1 Please do not encroach on the park itself, especially the wild spaces. When the weather is nice I take walks there almost every day. I enjoy the wildlife, the flora, and the peacefulness. Wood Lake does no t have the same 'vibe' and I would have to drive there vs. being able to walk to Vet's Park. 1 People need a quiet natural place within reach of their homes. Trees and Marshland do wonders for p eople and their mental health. 1 Parks are gathering places. It is crucial to utilize them as community spaces and not retail or housing. The Hub is a good example of poor choices. If the hub had been made into a park it would offer more to the community than it does currently. It is in dire need of revitalization. Don’t just give up and move on to destroying another green space. Adding more retail chains or a pharmacy would do nothing to b enefit the community that already lives here. Elevated dining or a brewery/brewpub would be a welco me addition compared to convenience stores or chains. Adding high density housing on the edges of t he area in question would block off the park from the community. You would essentially be selling off t he park, it’s view, and use to a housing complex. How does that benefit the current community? How many of the examples of developments provided, have lower level offerings to the community? 1 No more apartment buildings. Its RUINING Richfield 1 My biggest concern is to protect the "Honoring All Veterans Memorial" from vandals. We should respe ct all those who have their names engraved and the future names to be put on the memorial. With the legion being a good neighbor, I think this can be accomplished. 1 Make a new community center for resident to use for social activities. Ties in with the pool , golf and h ockey. Don't destroy the park 1 Leave Vets Park alone. Read the Aesop fable about killing the goose that laid golden eggs 1 Leave as is..makes Richfield a livable community. No condoms etc.1 Just leave Vet's Park alone.1 It should be done with Prevailing wage and local hire preferences 1 It seems Veterans Park is looked at for re-development over and over because of the land available. The park is a treasure in our city. It is a place to enjoy quiet and wildlife, to walk and bike. I'm fine with upgrading current amenities but not ok with adding new amenities. I believe we should preserve the g reen space we have. It offers a respite from hurried life. To be able to be in nature in the middle of the city is of great value and one of the reasons I love living here. Portland and 66th street traffic is very h eavy already and building condos/apartments with mixed use businesses along the project area will in crease traffic on these roads. Bringing additional traffic could be problematic for traffic and pedestrian s considering the plan to decrease Portland from 4 to 2 lanes north of 66th street. 1 If purchased , buyer provide space facing memorial for Legion activities (Meetings, Ceremonies, food and drinks 1 I want a Labyrinth walking path at Vet's Park! Can this happen?1 I think if the corridor along 66th is all converted to medium-density housing, traffic will be an issue sinc e 66th was converted to one lane (which I think was a mistake). I get a little nervous about having a lo t of rental units vs owernship units with the proximity to the park. Non-stakeholders will have less ince ntive to keep the area clean. But also understand the need for rentals. 1 I think building up across the street from the park makes a lot of sense but am VERY hesitant about b uilding up directly adjacent to the park. To me the different parts of the study area should be treated v ery differently. 1 I really would love to see "development not displacement" listed as a priority for this project. Existing c ommunity members shouldn't be evicted or alienated from our community for the sake of having a pre ttier street. I think that priorities should be given to local businesses (both in construction contracts an d in the businesses that eventually occupy those spaces). We don't need another walgreens or dairy queen in the area. We need places where community can thrive. Also I think it would be neat to includ e a nature/sustainability/climate change educational feature in the area once it's completed, even just a sign/poster thing that folks can read and learn more about what was done here. (Kind of like the rain water reclamation sites along University Avenue near Hamline Avenue in St. Paul). I think that what y ou did to the American Legion was a dick move, and I worry about what might be done to other small l ocally owned/community run businesses in the redevelopment area. 1 I love the idea of bringing more businesses to the area. I do not like the idea of condos and apartment s. One reason we moved to this area was for the more urban feel and to be out of the cities. Adding al l these medium and heavy size living complexes is not helping with the urban feel. What Richfield nee ds is grocery stores, restaurant options and shopping options. 1 I love living close to veterans park. As it stands, I am one house away from preexisting apartments th at border the park. If changes are made, I’d like those changes to ultimately raise my property value; not lower it. Don’t have commercial immediately adjacent to single family homes, and don’t have apart ments that will tower and dwarf single family homes stand immediately adjacent. Otherwise I am all fo r redevelopment. Walkability was a big deal when we picked our house four years ago, and I’d love fo r this area to be even more walkable! 1 I live within three blocks of the park, so while not in the study area I am immediately adjacent to it. I ru n through the part several days a week. I worry about traffic, noise, and loosing the sense of being aw ay from the bustle that you can get in the park. 1 I feel that the openness and welcome feeling that Veterans Park has now for the whole community ne eds to be kept--this is a place to come to walk, bike, play, meet friends, see others from the communit y at places like the Pool, Farmers Market and Concerts at the Bandshell. Blocking that NE corner with a big wall of apartments or business would really be sad. 1 I am really excited about this project and hope that the project will bring more retail as well as resident ial space to the community. In addition, I hope that the development has some affordable housing opti ons to allow for a wide range of individuals to live in this space and not just high income individuals. I am also interested in seeing how the project can support Richfield and create more destinations for p eople to come to and experience all that the city has to offer! 1 GREEN SPACES are an important city asset now and in the future!!!!1 Get rid of minimum parking requirements to fully take advantage of the investment in bus rapid transit.1 Answered: 51 Skipped: 56 Do not develop it. You will ruin the park, the water park, and the ice rink.1 Developing commercial and small business opportunities in the area would increase tax base and offe r updated buildings and appeal. I also hope it won’t move existing ones from the area. I love the park cause it’s an escape from the city. Don’t build a city around the thing. If we wanted to live among cond os and apartments I would have bought a house downtown Minneapolis. 1 build baby build 1 Again, Im not thrilled at the idea of making high density housing or anything more than 2 stories high. There are many places around the hub that need attention before a project changing the landscape of the park and residential feel of the veterans park neighborhood. Please don't build monstrosities in th e neighborhood that would make it regretful for me to have bought a house in this area. 1 Adding apartments to an area with traffic issues already will only make it worse. There are enough em pty retail buildings in Richfield - we do not need to build new retail spaces. Apartments can be built ot her places than adjacent to park. The fact the park doesn't bump up to housing makes it feel safer. Ri chfield is the hometown suburb - Hometown to me means single family housing, not stacks of apartm ents on each other, quit taking away the small town / home town feel of Richfield. 1 0 PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN24 ATTACHMENT B - SURVEY 2 PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 1 / 31 49.09%54 18.18%20 10.00%11 7.27%8 15.45%17 Q1 Personal Connections: Support redevelopment projects that preserves and enhances the ability of residents and users of Veterans Memorial Park to make personal connections to the park. Answered: 110 Skipped: 2 TOTAL 110 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 Not sure what that means 5/13/2021 2:38 PM 2 Are you asking if we need better paths for access and more parking for the park? Yes. People need to be able to park close by the veteran’s memorial not way over by the playground. That lot gets full on busy days and is too far for many to walk ! 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 3 Really don't understand where you are going with this question. You want to know if we should have more sidewalks into the park to promote access? 5/12/2021 9:48 PM 4 As long as it’s not multi unit housing or tall buildings.5/10/2021 7:25 AM 5 don't want to loose the natural habitats for all to enjoy while not making profit 5/9/2021 9:54 PM 6 The continuity of park usage should not be damaged by redevelopement just for profit 5/9/2021 2:25 PM 7 key message here is RESIDENTS 5/9/2021 10:07 AM 8 It fine just as it is 5/9/2021 9:47 AM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 2 / 31 9 I support projects that enhance the park itself- repaving paths, a sound barrier on the Northside along 62, increasing native plant gardens. 5/9/2021 8:44 AM 10 Although Veterans is a "premier " destination in Richfield, it still has the feel of being a "quiet park". I would like to preserve this as much as possible. 5/8/2021 7:04 PM 11 I do not think the park needs to be redeveloped.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 12 Your redevelopment will ruin the park w/private development.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 13 This is a stupidly worded question. What is a personal connection? Is that to a tree or connection to a skyscraper? Could mean both. So I don’t connect with sky scrapers. Does that make sense? Or do you think this is a stupidly worded question. Please call me any time. 5/7/2021 10:25 PM 14 Keep as is 5/7/2021 8:33 PM 15 I think the land from the area should be part of the park and kept a natural area.5/7/2021 6:38 PM 16 This will bring more traffic to streets that were once 4 lanes but are now restricted to two. 5/7/2021 3:57 PM 17 Do not allow new building in the park that belongs to the residents of Richfield and not to only our city leaders 5/7/2021 2:00 PM 18 There is no mention of the Legion -- the Legion needs to have a strong, highly visible building onsite. They have been there for over 50 years. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 19 Leave the park alone. Of anything add to the green space bot surround it with high density housing. 5/6/2021 9:54 PM 20 This shouldn't even be a question. Veterans park is one of the best parks in the state, it would be a complete shame to build Apt/Condos anywhere close to this landmark... 5/6/2021 8:13 PM 21 The only enhances needed are new paths. Let the park be.5/6/2021 5:10 PM 22 "Preserving and enhancing" can be defined too many different ways for me to give a reasoned answer to this. 5/6/2021 4:53 PM 23 I reject the premise of "redevelopment"; it's code for ruin the park evermore 5/6/2021 4:44 PM 24 Neither additional development nor redevelopment would enhance the community or the park. 5/6/2021 4:03 PM 25 This questions assumes “redevelopment” is positive.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 26 What exactly needs to be redeveloped? Highrises surrounding green space is a terrible idea...Richfield has developed enough by displacing single family homes 5/6/2021 2:16 PM 27 No high density housing near the park!5/6/2021 1:35 PM 28 Keep the legion 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 29 No redevelopment, please. Keep the Vets Park area residential as it is now.5/6/2021 1:22 PM 30 No more Developments no more TIFs let us realize the pros and cons of existing developments first 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 31 It would depend on what the redevelopment is. No apartments or housing!! Open land is not plentiful anymore, and it is wonderful to have the area for walking, picnicking, etc. Please do not put housing there - as like the housing by target, it looks terrible and makes everything look scrunched together. Housing of any kind, particularly hi-rise, would take away from the area’s charm 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 32 As long as the plans fo mot take single family homes.5/6/2021 11:05 AM 33 I believe a community center where the Legion currently is would greatly enhance the park 5/6/2021 10:53 AM 34 Would like to see more trees, maybe a garden, integrated art/sculptures in open areas, etc. Also is a great space to see urban wildlife. I heard there were otters I have yet to see and that keeps me coming back to find them :) 5/6/2021 10:43 AM 35 What are you trying to ask by this question? How do you intend for people to make an individual connection?? 5/6/2021 10:04 AM 36 Do not take people's homes or scum up the view with tall apartment buildings 5/6/2021 9:59 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 3 / 31 PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 4 / 31 30.63%34 26.13%29 13.51%15 15.32%17 14.41%16 Q2 Park & Neighborhood Connectivity: Increase connectivity to Veterans Memorial Park by incorporating vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle connections between park destinations (e.g., the memorial, lake, ice arena, and swimming pool), neighborhoods, and redevelopment sites along Portland Avenue and 66th Street. Answered: 111 Skipped: 1 TOTAL 111 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 Bicycle lanes within reason, not dominant.5/13/2021 2:38 PM 2 Improve the parking and the sidewalks into the park like along the 66th street entrance to the ice arena has no sidewalk walking in and there is currently no path to connect to the walking paths as they only made a path to the bandshell! 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 3 Connection to memorial garden by handicapped and elderly people is important. Parking by memorial is a must. But let's not fill the park with criss crossing sidewalks and roads. 5/12/2021 9:48 PM 4 Portland Ave NEEDS to be safer for families - especially those with small children who use the park for recreational activities. 5/10/2021 3:19 PM 5 As long as it’s not multiunit housing or tall buildings 5/10/2021 7:25 AM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 5 / 31 6 Need more recycling, better pick up for recycling and trash if you are wanting to increase foot traffic with electic buses 5/9/2021 9:54 PM 7 The space being redevoped should be part of the Park 5/9/2021 2:25 PM 8 Yes except adding vehicle lanes 5/9/2021 11:12 AM 9 Seems to me there are enough parking and bike trails 5/9/2021 9:47 AM 10 We have plenty of high and medium density apartments. It's a horrible idea to put a high density apartment/housing on Veterans Park (old Legion). 5/8/2021 11:31 PM 11 Although I would not oppose improved pedestrian and bicycle connections, I would strongly oppose increased vehicle access. The parking lot Veteran's Park currently has is substantial enough to accommodate the volume of visitors. 5/8/2021 7:04 PM 12 There are already existing sidewalks, streets, and bike paths that connect people to the park. 5/8/2021 4:29 PM 13 No. Just no.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 14 There are already plenty of access points, but there needs to be repaving of the paths.5/8/2021 8:06 AM 15 Provide better access for bike and pedestrians, minimize vehicle traffic on 64th 5/8/2021 8:03 AM 16 This is also a stupid question. There is one answer and multiple questions here. I agree that we should connect by incorporation connection for all of the above but not between each destination. 5/7/2021 10:25 PM 17 Keep as is 5/7/2021 8:33 PM 18 I have actually been told by the city and county that they would NOT add additional pedestrian crosswalks at Portland and 66th Street when asked. Odd since the point is to make MORE accessibility and safer crossings 5/7/2021 6:38 PM 19 particularly when you are walking around the park, you have to go behind the ice arena, ad that spot is a bit unsightly. would be nice if the paths were more 'official' 5/7/2021 5:52 PM 20 More traffic = more noise. It is hard to cross 66th or portland on foot now. Don't make it worse! 5/7/2021 3:57 PM 21 The park currently has sufficient access 5/7/2021 2:00 PM 22 Better crosswalks. Lighted and similar to the one by local roots.5/7/2021 12:58 PM 23 Crosswalks on 66th at Park and other loctions are adequate.5/7/2021 10:45 AM 24 This principle does not address that the Legion has their Post home there and that the Legion needs to continue to have a highly visible and large enough building to serve the entire community. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 25 Also add movable seating 5/7/2021 8:42 AM 26 The park is very accessible already.5/6/2021 8:58 PM 27 As long as it doesn’t take single family housing 5/6/2021 8:46 PM 28 Bike path/lanes run in all sides, not sure how more connected it needs to be?5/6/2021 5:10 PM 29 ...but see above comment 5/6/2021 4:44 PM 30 There are already pedestrian and bicycle connections between all of these places. No one is inconvenienced by not being able to drive from the rink to the park without going around the block. 5/6/2021 4:03 PM 31 These already exist to great extent.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 32 A plan showing intended changes is necessary prior to answering this question 5/6/2021 2:16 PM 33 Make the park useful for the existing community 5/6/2021 1:35 PM 34 Already have plenty of bike accessibility. Keep the legion 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 35 Paths are good. Redevelopment is bad 5/6/2021 1:22 PM 36 AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT INVOLVE REMOVING EXISTING HOMES 5/6/2021 1:05 PM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 6 / 31 37 Bike/pedestrian path down 64th st in both directions would be great connecting target shopping to east richfield 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 38 There is already plenty of connectivity. The single driving lane each way on 66th already causes Issues with traffic when you get behind a bus, a police car that makes a traffic stop, a garbage truck. There is plenty of access already 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 39 There as lready is adequate access to the park.5/6/2021 11:05 AM 40 Agree with pedestrian and bike connections. Enough vehicle access already.5/6/2021 10:43 AM 41 Does this mean more roads, asphalt? Then, no. I’m unclear what this question is asking 5/6/2021 10:15 AM 42 I do think the park and areas should be accessible. I have concerns about more of the limited green space being destroyed to accomplish that goal. I want the park presevered but accessible. 5/6/2021 10:04 AM 43 We already have bike lanes, it is freely nice right now 5/6/2021 9:59 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 7 / 31 5.41%6 9.91%11 6.31%7 18.02%20 60.36%67 Q3 Diversify Housing Options: Use redevelopment sites to expand the mix of housing in the area (e.g. row/townhouse, affordable units, courtyard apartments, courtyard cottages, and live-work units). Answered: 111 Skipped: 1 TOTAL 111 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 We don’t need diversified or any other housing at the park. It is a community park and should be preserved. Keep the space open as park. We cannot easily get back green space once it's gone. 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 2 How about don't build there!!!5/12/2021 9:48 PM 3 we do not want multifamily built in the park. Please do not knockdown houses that are across the street of Vet's Park. 5/12/2021 12:12 PM 4 As a homeowner, I along with many others in the community are opposed to such high-density apartments that will bring crime to the area. We along with many others have invested in renovating our homes and do not want to see such a negative impact on the community. 5/10/2021 3:19 PM 5 As a home owner on 5th Ave S., I - and many others - are opposed to a high-density development being planned/located on the current American Legion site/parking lot adjacent to Veteran's Memorial Park. We feel such housing would disrupt the fabric of our community, 5/10/2021 3:19 PM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 8 / 31 create more traffic/noise and potentially facilitate petty theft/crime - something ALL homeowners in this area are highly opposed to! 6 The residential sites currently going up is not diversity housing, they are monster buildings that ruin the site lines to the park and streets. 5/9/2021 9:54 PM 7 If there is true affordable housing 5/9/2021 9:10 PM 8 The areas shown should not be converted to housing at all!5/9/2021 2:25 PM 9 I'm in favor of medium density vs high. Townhomes (yes) vs apartments 5/9/2021 11:12 AM 10 We do not need high density housing in that corridor, we are a SMALL TOWN suburb, keep us small town. Keep single family homes the priority for development. 5/9/2021 10:07 AM 11 Leave the residential houses intact 5/9/2021 9:47 AM 12 I love the diversity that is Richfield. I feel as though redevelopment sites will expand higher- end units and actually decrease the amount of affordable units. 5/9/2021 8:44 AM 13 More single family homes. If anything, we need to align with trends promoting property value increases. 5/8/2021 11:31 PM 14 Single family housing is in Richfield's best interest. I understand that this will likely not remain, but I believe that "affordable housing" and/or increasing population through multi-family housing will lead to exponential potential for deterioration of the park's current aesthetics. 5/8/2021 7:04 PM 15 The existing housing compliments the peacefulness of the park.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 16 No skyscrapers, towers, or condos to shade the park.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 17 We almost need a moratorium on senior and high density 5/8/2021 8:14 AM 18 There are already plenty of housing options along 66th, plus new ones near Target. I am strongly against adding tall buildings along Portland. 5/8/2021 8:06 AM 19 Leave park a park and buy the properties as they become available to claim more park area. Not more housing. 5/7/2021 10:25 PM 20 We do want Minneapolis-lite, no 2040. Focus on public safety and crime reduction versus your quest to be like Minneapolis 5/7/2021 8:33 PM 21 This is a neighborhood area and should stay that way. No HIGH RISE apartments or LOW INCOME please 5/7/2021 6:38 PM 22 this needs to be done carefully with thought toward existing single family homes, so things transition nicely 5/7/2021 5:52 PM 23 Making these changes makes way for lowering community standards of noise, peace, and quiet. 5/7/2021 3:57 PM 24 This sounds like the city just wants more money. Our city is already a very diverse community. 5/7/2021 2:00 PM 25 The homes & apartments that are established are great just the way they are.5/7/2021 12:58 PM 26 Please do no ttake any additional existing homes.5/7/2021 10:45 AM 27 No reference to the Legion in this principle. The City needs to incorporate what the Legion needs to continue their mission of serving veterans, elderly , youth and low-income families. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 28 It would make the area more appealing and add depth 5/7/2021 8:42 AM 29 I do not believe there should be any high density housing in the 66th and Portland area. If there is I would be opposed to anything above 2 or 3 stories. I think this is a good opportunity to build townhouses , that blend in with the housing already in the area. Ideally I would like to see 2 story townhouses, with the first floor being wheelchair accessible. 5/7/2021 12:17 AM 30 Please dont turn this into a low cost or high density housing area towering over the park 5/6/2021 9:54 PM 31 I am so tired of nothing but housing developments going up on every open inch of space around here. And all the high rise buildings take away from being able to see the city. Too 5/6/2021 9:24 PM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 9 / 31 many high buildings and enough already with apartments and other dwellings. Please stop!!! 32 LEAVE IT AS IS 5/6/2021 8:13 PM 33 I would have to see the plan. A mixed plan that didn't exceed 2-3 stories and was well blended to the single family housing would be great 5/6/2021 5:57 PM 34 Apartments/town houses are their own little community, which defeats the idea of making the park more accessible. It will do the complete opposite 5/6/2021 5:10 PM 35 We need more affordable housing. That's it.5/6/2021 4:53 PM 36 Many businesses will retain a heavily online workforce after the pandemic. The need to live in an urban area will decline as a result of this. People are going to choose to move further away from the metro if there is no need to commute. 5/6/2021 4:03 PM 37 I am not looking to add housing to the neighborhood. It is already quite urban and we do not need a greater number of residents or more available housing. The purpose of the city government is to serve the community in the way it wants...not push development projects to increase tax revenue and programming opportunities (unless those are goals for most residents. For my part, I don’t want more neighbors, busier streets, or more programs. 5/6/2021 3:15 PM 38 These areas should be consumed by the park to preserve the environment.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 39 Please stop removing single family homes and putting in multi-story developments 5/6/2021 2:16 PM 40 High density housing will destroy the natural sunlight to the park and increase parking and residential traffic, which will disrupt the wildlife habitats of the park. No high density housing! 5/6/2021 1:35 PM 41 No apartments. Low profile commercial retail. But keep the legion 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 42 I agree, but am trust no more existing homes will be eliminated in the area to build additional housing? 5/6/2021 1:25 PM 43 Keep the single family neighborhood feel as is,5/6/2021 1:22 PM 44 Same as question 1 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 45 No!!!! keep the land open or put another restaurant-type place there 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 46 Leave the single family homes! Sick of blocks and bocks of high density housing. High density does not encourage families. 5/6/2021 11:05 AM 47 We have enough condo's and apartments 5/6/2021 10:56 AM 48 We need more affordable housing. We also need an equitable community center.5/6/2021 10:53 AM 49 Diversify housing in a way that minimizes vehicular traffic.5/6/2021 10:43 AM 50 Residential setting could lead to more waste, debris/garbage in the park, more traffic (street and walkways), added public safety concerns (more chance for assaults and other crimes), streets cannot support the additional traffic (turns on and off Portland or 66th going both directions; may lead to needing street renovations) 5/6/2021 10:24 AM 51 Richfield hasn't finished current housing developments.5/6/2021 10:04 AM 52 Nope! Why would you do this?! Clutter up the area and increase population density, hard NO 5/6/2021 9:59 AM 53 Quit tearing down single family homes and destroying the very make up of the city. Just stop! 5/6/2021 9:54 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 10 / 31 11.61%13 35.71%40 14.29%16 10.71%12 27.68%31 Q4 Convenient Commercial: Encourage a mix of community and small neighborhood commercial businesses in proximity to residential areas and the park destinations as an important amenity for residents and park visitors. Answered: 112 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 112 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 Although I support small business locations in Richfield, no businesses or buildings should be added in the area along the park. 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 2 I like the idea of places for small businesses to be able to try and make ago of it. I don't think in the park is the right place. 5/12/2021 9:48 PM 3 Would welcome small businesses that are within walking distance and help enhance the community. 5/10/2021 3:19 PM 4 No commercial businesses on Parkland. Parks should be a place for people to connect nature. 5/10/2021 7:25 AM 5 Please consider quality non fast food dining emulating eat street of Nicollet Ave, Uptown Grand St in St Paul 5/10/2021 7:07 AM 6 We need more small business but not these cracker jack large corporations, again profits do not justify destroying the park 5/9/2021 9:54 PM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 11 / 31 7 Priority to BIPOC businesses.5/9/2021 9:10 PM 8 We should not sell off parts of the park for commercial use. The Nilson funeral home is OK. 5/9/2021 2:25 PM 9 I'd love to see 66th street from target to Veteran's park look like west end.5/9/2021 11:12 AM 10 We do not need businesses in that area. It should be kept a nice outdoor space that can be enjoyed by many, not commercialized. 5/9/2021 10:07 AM 11 But not at the expensive. Of current residential homes 5/9/2021 9:47 AM 12 I am not opposed to developing the empty lot on close to the corner on Portland and 66th but there are many businesses along 66th already- they might be a block or two further east but I would agree with developing some of these areas before changing neighborhood feel along the south side of 66th. 5/9/2021 8:44 AM 13 There is already an appropriate "...mix of community and small neighborhood commercial businesses in proximity to residential areas and the park destinations". To "encourage" more would increase vehicle traffic in and around the park, disturb wildlife and may adversely affect the cleanliness of the park. 5/8/2021 7:04 PM 14 66th Street already offers many commercial businesses, especially east of the park. It would detract from the park to add any more commercial businesses than there are already. 5/8/2021 4:29 PM 15 Leave the businesses there alone.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 16 Support, don't destroy small businesses. Every development project is removing 8 small businesses and replacing them with 1 or 2 large chains. 5/8/2021 8:14 AM 17 Restaurants like Sea Salt and Sandcastle are very popular at Minneapolis parks, can something similar be added near the playground on the east side of the park? More attractive than the ice cream place and offering adult options. 5/8/2021 8:06 AM 18 If people want to go to the park. They want to enjoy nature. If they want retail, they can go to a retail area. We don’t need retail in the park. We need more park in the park 5/7/2021 10:25 PM 19 Keep as is. No housing displacement 5/7/2021 8:33 PM 20 I think that too much commercial businesses in the park can create negative impacts on wildlife and nature, especially with litter from take out food etc 5/7/2021 6:38 PM 21 businesses that make sense like coffee shops or lunch places. Not pawn shops, gas stations, or funeral parlors. 5/7/2021 5:52 PM 22 No rowdy businesses such as certain types of restaurants and all drinking establishments! 5/7/2021 3:57 PM 23 They are currently many business in Richfield already that provide the needs of the residents 5/7/2021 2:00 PM 24 Local roots is a great addition, along with the enchanted rock garden moving closer.5/7/2021 12:58 PM 25 Please do not replace homes with mixed/commercial developments.5/7/2021 10:45 AM 26 Again, where is the Legion building -- the Legion needs to receive the highest priority in this area -- and then everything else is planned around the Legion. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 27 I think this would 100% make the park more of a destination!!5/7/2021 8:42 AM 28 No big stores!!!5/7/2021 12:17 AM 29 As long as it doesn’t take single family homes 5/6/2021 8:46 PM 30 The current mixed community is great. I wouldn't want to see a ton more added because the neighborhoods already have high traffic volume 5/6/2021 5:57 PM 31 Would especially like to see affordable space for independent businesses.5/6/2021 5:48 PM 32 As long as it's not rezoning.5/6/2021 4:53 PM 33 Space for these businesses already exists on 66th street and Portland.5/6/2021 4:03 PM 34 While I wouldn’t mind seeing a few more restaurants or small businesses, this question is very vague. I am very wary of “encouraging” development. 5/6/2021 3:15 PM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 12 / 31 35 Increased traffic will make the park feel less like a park.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 36 Again, context necessary 5/6/2021 2:16 PM 37 As long as said commercial use is valuable to the community and doesn't disrupt the park. 5/6/2021 1:35 PM 38 Agree. Smaller non suburban businesses and keep the legion 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 39 Will this increase traffic in the area?5/6/2021 1:25 PM 40 No new businesses around Vets Park, please.5/6/2021 1:22 PM 41 Do not remove current resident homes on 66th between portland & 12th!5/6/2021 1:05 PM 42 Seriously Richfield is just minutes from anything you could want. Do not take single family homes for businesses which brings more non-residents and therefore increases crime. 5/6/2021 11:05 AM 43 Small/local shops would be good. No chains are needed in this area.5/6/2021 10:53 AM 44 Would love to see more neighborhood restaurants as well as small unique local businesses and organizations (avoid strip mall style franchises) 5/6/2021 10:43 AM 45 Added traffic on streets, with more people trying to make turns with busy streets can lead to more accidents 5/6/2021 10:24 AM 46 One thing I appreciate about Richfield is the variety of local businesses 5/6/2021 10:04 AM 47 Not needed and wouldn't be utilized 5/6/2021 9:59 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 13 / 31 42.34%47 25.23%28 9.91%11 6.31%7 16.22%18 Q5 Sustainable Development: Use sustainable design practices and new technology in developments that will help create a healthy, sustainable, vibrant neighborhood, and contribute to the park environment. Answered: 111 Skipped: 1 TOTAL 111 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 This comment is too vague and broad to agree on. We should add only things to beautify the park space like sculptures/gardens. Also keep most of it green space. A solar flower could provide interest and be a source of electricity for the park. 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 2 Don't build. Or how about some solar flowers to help generate electricity for pool/ice rink and have a nice look. 5/12/2021 9:48 PM 3 sustainable design practices equate to very high expenditures and increased taxes 5/12/2021 12:12 PM 4 As long as the design is not on commercial buildings nor tall buildings nor multi-unit housing 5/10/2021 7:25 AM 5 Only if you can commit to all incomes of living and not brining in people from Edina 5/9/2021 9:54 PM 6 The City had an opportunity for a community center and chose to incorporate those residences into the park. 5/9/2021 2:25 PM 7 I'm not sure what is meant here, but if you mean city provided wi-fi, garbage / recycling / compost, then I agree. 5/9/2021 10:07 AM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 14 / 31 8 How many more people can the veterans park substain 5/9/2021 9:47 AM 9 I don't see how big housing units can help create sustainable development.5/9/2021 8:44 AM 10 I would fully support sustainable design practices that would maintain the "health" of the park, its visitors and immediate residents. 5/8/2021 7:04 PM 11 I’m in favor of sustaining a vibrant neighborhood and park, but adding multi- resident housing would detract from that. 5/8/2021 4:29 PM 12 Sustainable sounds expensive 5/8/2021 8:14 AM 13 Keep as is 5/7/2021 8:33 PM 14 How can you bring in more people and not raise crime levels?5/7/2021 3:57 PM 15 I don’t feel there’s a need for any more business or housing in Richfield that brings more crime to the city. They already can’t provide a crime free environment 5/7/2021 2:00 PM 16 Please, another principle that does not address at all the importance of the Legion to be the primary focus for this property. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 17 It needs to be sustainable, honestly it shouldn’t even be a question 5/7/2021 8:42 AM 18 Preserving the park should be the #1 priority of the project.5/6/2021 9:24 PM 19 AGAIN LEAVE THIS AREA ALONE 5/6/2021 8:13 PM 20 Only if there are no apartments, condos or businesses on park land 5/6/2021 5:45 PM 21 If there is any new development, it must be done sustainably.5/6/2021 4:53 PM 22 Developments are unnecessary and deplete the character of the city.5/6/2021 4:03 PM 23 “Sustainable design practices” is vague. I also believe our neighborhood is vibrant and needs little or no “development” 5/6/2021 3:15 PM 24 Again, adding housing and business will take away from the park.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 25 As long as you keep the legion and little vegas 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 26 I have no idea what kind of new terminology this implies so I cannot answer.this i 5/6/2021 1:22 PM 27 Do not remove current resident homes on 66th between portland & 12th 5/6/2021 1:05 PM 28 As long as the requirement is on the developer and not residents via TIF 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 29 And in the concept of this, does not mean high density housing.5/6/2021 11:05 AM 30 Sustainable design and new technology used in the creation of a community center would put us on the map! 5/6/2021 10:53 AM 31 Anything that is built should be sustainable but I do not agree that we need high density “developments”. 5/6/2021 10:47 AM 32 Minimize vehicles/parking lot restrictions, bike parking, green space requirements, minimize noise, lighted sign brightness limits, mindful of wildlife in the area 5/6/2021 10:43 AM 33 Again disagree with redevelopment of any kind in this area 5/6/2021 9:59 AM 34 Stop tearing down single family homes 5/6/2021 9:54 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 15 / 31 30.00%33 19.09%21 19.09%21 7.27%8 24.55%27 Q6 Building Transition: Require site design and building architectural characteristics that provide appropriate transitions between single family residential neighborhoods and higher intensity uses. Answered: 110 Skipped: 2 TOTAL 110 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 Don’t build anything in the park especially not high density/intensity!5/12/2021 9:54 PM 2 Don't build high intensity in the park!!!!!!!!5/12/2021 9:48 PM 3 However, I'm opposed to high density development in the area.5/10/2021 3:19 PM 4 Opposed to high-density development[s] adjacent to Veteran's Memorial Park unless mixed- use/condominiums. 5/10/2021 3:19 PM 5 No high density housing in Veterans Park. No tall buildings. Perhaps a low rise community center. Or nature building similar to Wood Lake. 5/10/2021 7:25 AM 6 Need to incorporate site lines of the park to make sure flight plans of birds are destroyed 5/9/2021 9:54 PM 7 Let these spaces remain part of the park!5/9/2021 2:25 PM 8 Disagree with higher density uses in this area!5/9/2021 10:07 AM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 16 / 31 9 Once again to many people. Using the park?5/9/2021 9:47 AM 10 I don't want higher intensity uses therefore, there would be no need for an appropriate transition 5/9/2021 8:44 AM 11 We need to limit height of any new developments.5/8/2021 11:31 PM 12 I would like to limit the "high intensity" uses altogether, but if they are going to happen regardless then of course I would hope there would be "appropriate transitions". 5/8/2021 7:04 PM 13 I am opposed to higher intensity uses adjacent to the park.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 14 Leave the neighborhood alone.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 15 ...or don't replace the 1R 5/8/2021 8:14 AM 16 Please don't build anything tall, or long rows of buildings that block all the views, especially on the north side of 66th or the east side of Portland., 5/8/2021 8:06 AM 17 Again, I would live in Minneapolis if I wanted Richfield to be Minneapolis. Focus on crime reduction! 5/7/2021 8:33 PM 18 except that we really don't desire high density right in the space adjacent to the park. We have plenty of apartment buildings by the park on both the south and west side 5/7/2021 6:38 PM 19 What's wrong with single family homes. (I live in an apartment on the circle of 66th and Portland.) 5/7/2021 3:57 PM 20 Do not want a new building around our park that’s currently used by my children 5/7/2021 2:00 PM 21 No reference has yet been made to what the needs of the Legion. The Legion is 95 years old; has been on this site for over 40 years and focuses all of their activities to help veterans, low income and community. The Legion needs to be the first priority in this project. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 22 Yes, Richfield needs this everywhere!! Like how does cedar not have screening???5/7/2021 8:42 AM 23 I feel like this is contradictory. an appropriate transition would not be high intensity. Appropriate transitions would be no more than 2 stores, and not hiding the park from the street. 5/7/2021 12:17 AM 24 Keep Richfield single family residential 5/6/2021 9:25 PM 25 No more housing!5/6/2021 9:24 PM 26 Another dumb question 5/6/2021 8:13 PM 27 Yes, architecture styles should retain the community aesthetic.5/6/2021 4:03 PM 28 I am in favor of single family residential neighborhoods and a reasonable number of multi-unit housing...I do not see a need for building more “high intensity use” sites. Again, as a resident, I don’t want a denser community “developed” and I would really like the city to stop pushing this agenda on residents. 5/6/2021 3:15 PM 29 Fancy words to me that mean more sidewalks and roads in the park.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 30 Stop adding so many high density developments before Richfield ceases to be the residential community it was, is and should be 5/6/2021 2:16 PM 31 I don't trust that the city planners have the ability to do this as they have proven with previously approved projects that they don't have an understanding of what this even means. Giant apartments do not belong near parks nor backed up to single family homes. 5/6/2021 1:35 PM 32 But no high rise high density apartments. Keep little Vegas and the legion 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 33 Do not remove current resident homes on 66th between portland & 12th 5/6/2021 1:05 PM 34 Dont build HD projects 5/6/2021 11:21 AM 35 Disagree because we should not be building more high density until we see ramifications of existing projects 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 36 Stop the high density housing. So this question is irrelevant. You are destroying the character and charm of Richfield by going to all high density. 5/6/2021 11:05 AM 37 If these transitions happen, it needs to be done well and the people being pushed out need to 5/6/2021 10:53 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 17 / 31 be compensated. 38 Again, build sustainably and beautifully, but don’t add high density.5/6/2021 10:47 AM 39 Woofta! I have a masters degree in the social sciences and have read this question several times, but still don't understand it! 5/6/2021 10:13 AM 40 Stop tearing down single family homes. To put up high density will NOT enhance Vets Park, it will DESTROY it. 5/6/2021 9:54 AM 41 The new townhomes by Target are horrible. If new high density residential buildings will go up I would prefer traditional looking rowhomes not modern designs that look terrible. 5/6/2021 9:48 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 18 / 31 45.87%50 14.68%16 18.35%20 1.83%2 19.27%21 Q7 Building Heights: Locate the tallest portions of buildings away from adjacent low density residences. For sites adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park, locate the tallest portions of buildings away from the park’s open areas. Answered: 109 Skipped: 3 TOTAL 109 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 Don’t go so tall it looks like a different Veterans Park are.5/13/2021 2:38 PM 2 Our park is not the place to build anything with more than one story. We don’t want the feeling of a city in our natural park setting. 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 3 Don't build or only build 2 stories. Anything taller will dominate the park...5/12/2021 9:48 PM 4 Again opposed to high-density living Veterans memorial park.5/10/2021 3:19 PM 5 Opposed to high-density development[s] adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park unless mixed- use/condominiums. 5/10/2021 3:19 PM 6 No new buildings in the park unless it is a community building.5/10/2021 7:34 AM 7 No tall buildings should be built in or around Veterans Memorial Par.5/10/2021 7:25 AM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 19 / 31 8 NO higher than 3 stories 5/10/2021 7:07 AM 9 If you put large buildings around the park, you are not for nature. You are only for profit. Must consider the long term effects of big buildings when they are not green like no glass, living walls. Practice what Finland and Sweden are doing in their new housing 5/9/2021 9:54 PM 10 Put them in some other part of Richfield 5/9/2021 2:25 PM 11 Don't have high buildings in this area!5/9/2021 10:07 AM 12 Why do we need high density housing 5/9/2021 9:47 AM 13 Again, I don't want tall buildings any where near Veterans park 5/9/2021 8:44 AM 14 I'm leaving Richfield if you build property value lowering apartments on Veterans Park.5/8/2021 11:31 PM 15 I would not like to see any buildings more than two stories tall next to the park. If buildings taller than single story are to be erected then yes, I would like the tallest portions of them to be as far away from the park as possible. 5/8/2021 7:04 PM 16 Tall buildings would detract from the beauty and peacefulness of the park.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 17 Do not ruin the park by building towers.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 18 ...or don't have more than 3 stories / 30ft in hight 5/8/2021 8:14 AM 19 A better option is to not build anything tall at all, it will ruin the overall aesthetic of the park. 5/8/2021 8:06 AM 20 Would love to see City of Richfield expand veterans park without any commercial or residential development 5/8/2021 8:03 AM 21 Stupid question. There is no option for me to say what I want if I don’t want buildings. You have not allowed for anyone in this survey to voice ideas and options that don’t include buildings. This is a very biased question that will lead people in one direction. Who did you hire to make up these vague and biased questions? the city can do better than this. 5/7/2021 10:25 PM 22 Poorly worded question and very poorly constructed survey.5/7/2021 8:33 PM 23 Please do not put any tall buildings to encroach on our skyline views and sunsets. The natural beauty and open space feeling is what attracts people to the park. People in a metro area crave open natural areas that are not hemmed in by tall buildings. Take Richfield Lake, for instance. When you walk around that lake, you feel like there are buildings and windows staring down at you from all sides. No matter how you point the camera, you always get a reflection or a background with a building in it. YUCK! Please don't make some huge towering building by the park. Keep our spaces open and peaceful. Please keep the area just part of the park instead of redeveloping it. This is our only chance to increase park size and preserve it for future generations. Why do you think it is a destination? BECAUSE it is a natural area. Keep it that way! 5/7/2021 6:38 PM 24 Don't you mean tallest buildings? How can you separate a building into portions?5/7/2021 3:57 PM 25 No building anything around our park 5/7/2021 2:00 PM 26 Don’t alter the current landscape 5/7/2021 12:58 PM 27 First, incorporate the needs of the Legion as priority -- then come up with principles that support and enhance the Legion's ability to serve their community. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 28 While I agree with this I don't think that anything should be more than 3 stories, and should not block the view of the park. 5/7/2021 12:17 AM 29 No tall buildings at all 5/7/2021 12:04 AM 30 Do not build sky scrapers next to our park 5/6/2021 9:54 PM 31 Preserve the park view 5/6/2021 9:24 PM 32 What?5/6/2021 8:13 PM 33 2-3 story maximum (current heights of the few apartment buildings - those could be removed & replaced but don't add a ton more 5/6/2021 5:57 PM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 20 / 31 34 Would prefer that exceptionally tall buildings not be allowed in Veteran's Park.5/6/2021 5:48 PM 35 BUT NO BUILDINGS ON PARK LAND 5/6/2021 5:45 PM 36 Do NOT put in a tall building where the funeral home currently sits, as it would shade the pool. 5/6/2021 4:53 PM 37 I am not sure just what type of height we are considering. I would say no to a high rise.5/6/2021 4:13 PM 38 However, anything taller than current structures bordering the park is too tall.5/6/2021 4:03 PM 39 Any necessarily tall structures should be as unobtrusive as possible.5/6/2021 3:15 PM 40 This is a moot point because the added traffic will deter from the park.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 41 Don't build multi story buildings around Vets Park 5/6/2021 2:16 PM 42 No tall buildings.5/6/2021 1:35 PM 43 How about no buildings taller than 2 stories and keep the legion 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 44 No tall buildings, please 5/6/2021 1:22 PM 45 Do not remove current resident homes on 66th between portland & 12th 5/6/2021 1:05 PM 46 No tall buildings anywhere 5/6/2021 12:55 PM 47 I guess it is already a done deal so why ask these questions 5/6/2021 11:21 AM 48 We must have strict limit on higher (i.e. 3 stories in full) instead of controlling layout to make them taller 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 49 Don’t want to see any buildings over one story 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 50 There should be no high buildings by the park and ruin the view.5/6/2021 11:05 AM 51 No more new buildings 5/6/2021 10:56 AM 52 Restrict building heights to protect views and minimize shadows 5/6/2021 10:43 AM 53 Buildings aren’t necessary 5/6/2021 10:24 AM 54 Don’t have a building that looks over the trees in the area 5/6/2021 10:24 AM 55 No high rise buildings!5/6/2021 10:21 AM 56 Don't put any bldgs....5/6/2021 9:59 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 21 / 31 62.73%69 14.55%16 7.27%8 1.82%2 13.64%15 Q8 Building Massing: Locate and design buildings to preserve views to/from the park’s open areas and minimize potential shadowing of the park. Answered: 110 Skipped: 2 TOTAL 110 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 Extremely important.5/13/2021 2:38 PM 2 A maximum height of one story is what we should maintain if anything is built. It should keep to the current status quo. Better yet, don’t build at all! 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 3 2 stories max or better yet do not build anything 5/12/2021 9:48 PM 4 No new buildings in the park unless it’s a community building!5/10/2021 7:34 AM 5 No tall buildings should be built. Only low rise buildings similar to Wood Lake nature center 5/10/2021 7:25 AM 6 Yes, put them somewhere else!5/9/2021 2:25 PM 7 don't take away the views of the park when driving by, don't build here 5/9/2021 10:07 AM 8 If new buildings are are an end point then yes, but why change anything 5/9/2021 9:47 AM 9 With the spaces under review, I don't see how it is obtainable to preserve the view. I live on the 5/9/2021 8:44 AM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 22 / 31 East side of the park and I do not want to see high rise in the skyline 10 As stated earlier, the buildings and homes currently adjacent to the park add to its peace and beauty. New development would detract from it. 5/8/2021 4:29 PM 11 Don't build new buildings.5/8/2021 4:29 PM 12 I so miss the days I could walk around woodlake without seeing skyscrapers 2 blocks away 5/8/2021 8:14 AM 13 Keep all new buildings to a minimum.5/8/2021 8:06 AM 14 Same as the prior question. This is insane!5/7/2021 10:25 PM 15 as explained above, we don't want to see the building in the photos of sunsets and we certainly don't want some HUGE towering rectangle box. If it is going to be there, vary the roof height and give it a cottage-like feel with angled roof peaks and charm so that it looks like a storybook destination, not a metropolis please. Or as I stated before, keep it natural! 5/7/2021 6:38 PM 16 This is great for the people who visit the park. But what about the residents near the park? Is it OK to block us? 5/7/2021 3:57 PM 17 The priority to preserve is the prominent and continued location of the Legion at this Portland property. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 18 See #7 5/6/2021 9:54 PM 19 Don't build buildings close to this site.5/6/2021 8:13 PM 20 Replace old dated buildings with mandates new landlords would need to allow long standing residents preference at cheaper rent 5/6/2021 5:57 PM 21 Would prefer that exceptionally tall buildings not be allowed in Veteran's Park.5/6/2021 5:48 PM 22 STREETS SHOULD BE BOUNDARIES SO NO VIEW AFFECTED.5/6/2021 5:45 PM 23 But what about the traffic nightmare that will come with high density bldgs in that area. It’s not great now after hockey games 5/6/2021 5:10 PM 24 New development is not necessary.5/6/2021 4:03 PM 25 buildings and development are constantly threatening to overtake what green spaces we have. Where they are essential, buildings should always come second to the park environment. 5/6/2021 3:15 PM 26 Simply preserving views isn’t enough. New buildings are the problem.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 27 Don't build multi story buildings around Vets park 5/6/2021 2:16 PM 28 No tall buildings or high density housing near the parks.5/6/2021 1:35 PM 29 Low buildings. Like the legion is now. Lower than street level and keep the legion 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 30 No tall buildings. No blocking the view of the park from 66th or Portland 5/6/2021 1:22 PM 31 Do not remove current resident homes on 66th between portland & 12th 5/6/2021 1:05 PM 32 No buildings = no shade issues 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 33 No tall buildings by the park.5/6/2021 11:05 AM 34 Enough with redevelopment like this 5/6/2021 10:56 AM 35 Restrict building heights to protect views 5/6/2021 10:43 AM 36 The building should in no way impact the park negatively 5/6/2021 10:24 AM 37 No bldgs 5/6/2021 9:59 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 23 / 31 22.32%25 19.64%22 16.96%19 10.71%12 30.36%34 Q9 Quantity of Parking: Minimize parking needs by leveraging the study area’s location along multimodal corridors to reduce the use of the automobile. Answered: 112 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 112 #COMMENTS (100 CHARACTER LIMIT):DATE 1 Be realistic rather than idealistic. An aging population isn’t not going to start biking or walking. More safety measures necessary for women and girls to feel safe walking and biking alone. 5/13/2021 2:38 PM 2 DO NOT reduce parking. When we do have festivals and active times in the park it can be very difficult to find parking and we should not be limiting families from coming because of it. Most residents in Richfield have vehicles. We wouldn’t use the park more if you leveraged the multimodal corridors. That actually can lead to more vandalism. 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 3 Do NOT decrease parking. This will create problems for events like the 4th of July or other groups. Those events make Richfield a destination. I have seen parking mostly full a number of times pre Covid19. Let's not drive parking out into the neighborhood if we can help it. 5/12/2021 9:48 PM 4 Seniors cannot bike, rollerskate, or use Skateboards to get to the park.5/10/2021 7:34 AM 5 People need a place to park. Not everybody has mobility especially in Richfield.5/10/2021 7:25 AM 6 Must start to think about more and safe bikes lanes vs parking, need to think about connecting 5/9/2021 9:54 PM Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 24 / 31 people by other modes of transportation vs having a large hot parking lot taking up room that could be used better 7 The parking lots that are there are usually already full, don't limit parking and push people to park on residential streets as it brings other issues like littering, etc 5/9/2021 10:07 AM 8 No need for more parking with the current situation or any new development 5/9/2021 9:47 AM 9 Every time this is done, you run out of parking....5/8/2021 8:14 AM 10 Additional parking on site more favorable than parking within the neighborhood 5/8/2021 8:03 AM 11 Huh? I have a college degree and my wife has a masters in education and we both agree the wording of this one is crazy. English is a second language for many people in our City. I thought you wanted the opinions of people. I think you should redo this survey with clear simple unbiased questions. Whatever you find for results is going to be sooo biased. 5/7/2021 10:25 PM 12 People have been able to figure out how to access the park via many modes of transportation without city council intervention. Just say you want more bike lanes if that is your objective. 5/7/2021 8:33 PM 13 I am not exactly sure what you are trying to say here. This is poorly worded. I want to have nice pedestrian trails and bike trails but I also want to have space for people to park and use automobiles. 5/7/2021 6:38 PM 14 This area is swamped with vehicular traffic. Most of those people need to drive their cars. How will you limit traffic to what already exists or less? 5/7/2021 3:57 PM 15 Absolutely not. Prioritize the Legion parking needs as top priority for this principle.5/7/2021 10:38 AM 16 Add more pedestrian and bike lanes, and narrow 66th so people don’t drive so fast 5/7/2021 8:42 AM 17 People with disabilities always get screwed when it comes to parking. It usually means that disabled people can't go anywhere during peak times, like weekends. 5/7/2021 12:17 AM 18 Don’t keep building things without appropriate parking 5/6/2021 9:25 PM 19 People need to drive. Limit cars, you limit who will go.5/6/2021 9:24 PM 20 Um... farmers market, Christmas trees, the 4th and big hockey turnys. Let alone one of the decent playgrounds for kids. 5/6/2021 8:13 PM 21 I disagree with the movement to minimize parking standards that will provide inadequate parking. 5/6/2021 5:48 PM 22 SENIORS CANNOT WALK 2 MILES TO PARK!5/6/2021 5:45 PM 23 So you remove the parking lots and now everyone going to the rink or pool have to park in the neighborhoods? Not sure you want kids crossing 66th that often 5/6/2021 5:10 PM 24 This is already the case. The only parking provided is for the pavilion and it is necessary for the farmers market. 5/6/2021 4:03 PM 25 We shouldn’t need much more parking if we don’t build multi-unit housing and expansive shopping/businesses. I don’t want to live in Edina. 5/6/2021 3:15 PM 26 No additional parking, please. Preserve the park land.5/6/2021 3:09 PM 27 Ensure adequate parking for any and all development.5/6/2021 2:16 PM 28 Know what else will prevent parking issues? NOT BUILDING HUNDREDS OF UNITS NEXT TO THE PARK! 5/6/2021 1:35 PM 29 Large lots already there. Keep the legion 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 30 The park meds parking if you don't want to disturb nearby neighborhoods 5/6/2021 1:22 PM 31 There needs to be much consideration for handicapp parking AND parents with young kids/strollers. Do not remove current resident homes on 66th between portland & 12th 5/6/2021 1:05 PM 32 Sean O'Leary must be drooling to get rid of Richfield of streets.5/6/2021 11:21 AM 33 It’s been discussed and proven over and over that expecting mass transit and bikes does not correlate with less vehicles 5/6/2021 11:11 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 25 / 31 34 We have enough bike lanes.5/6/2021 11:05 AM 35 Just stop 5/6/2021 10:56 AM 36 Already enough vehicular amenities. Encourage other means of transportation that already exist like continued bike and led infrastructure as well as bus stop upkeep. 5/6/2021 10:43 AM 37 This would reduce noise and traffic in the already busy area 5/6/2021 10:24 AM 38 I don't know how to answer this. It would be 'strongly agree' for me and my family personally. But I'm not sure if the city/community is there yet. 5/6/2021 10:13 AM 39 Parking is sufficient now 5/6/2021 9:59 AM 40 People drive cars, get that through your head. The Chamberlain has zero parking, and our neighborhood is now a parking lot. Learn from your mistakes. Again for the people ik the back, PEOPLE STILL DRIVE CARS. 5/6/2021 9:54 AM 41 Address risk of parking at rink/pool if not enough parking is at the residential bldg. Residents will still have to park somewhere. 5/6/2021 9:22 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 26 / 31 Q10 Please use this form to leave additional comments. Answered: 76 Skipped: 36 #RESPONSES DATE 1 Keep it beautiful in that area please 5/13/2021 2:38 PM 2 This study was worded in such a way that certain answers could be taken two different ways. It was very difficult to answer in a way that we feel you would clearly understand our viewpoints. The comment sections for each question were helpful but we are still concerned about the statistics being skewed if only the answer choices are looked at. Having a plan to preserve the park should have been an option overall. 5/12/2021 9:54 PM 3 I realize like everything else in Richfield it is already decided what will be done. We will end up with a multi story monster engulfing the west side and taking away not adding to the park experience. We should get something that brings beauty or adds to our parks. Solar tracking flowers? Art? Real flowers? Mix of these? 5/12/2021 9:48 PM 4 Please do not remove homes on the perimeter of Vet's Park. Please do not bring low income housing into the park area. 5/12/2021 12:12 PM 5 exciting but frightening 5/10/2021 5:42 PM 6 I strongly oppose high density apartments in this area due to the impact it will have on our neighborhood. Bring small businesses to the neighborhood mixed with condos. We did not invest in our home and renovate to have high density housing impact our neighborhood and bring down our home value. 5/10/2021 3:19 PM 7 Again, we are all for redevelopment in the study area if it enhances the community, increases home values and provides amenities to the local area. This does not mean however that residents who have called this neighborhood 'home' for the past 'x' years want their investment; e.g., home and normal daily lives impacted by the eyesore/burden of a high-density project. If I were to openly - and without biased - poll my neighbors and those directly adjacent to - or within the study area - I can confidently tell you they'd have no issues with this type of redevelopment in that retail atrocity on 66th and Nicollet Ave S.; e.g., the HUB. #Bulldoze HUB2040. 5/10/2021 3:19 PM 8 I walk around Vets Park every day and I enjoy seeing all the wildlife in the park, I hope all new development efforts will take into account the impact of wildlife in the park. Also I would love to some basketball hoops at the park or an additional outdoor volleyball court as I know they would be well used. 5/10/2021 11:58 AM 9 The park should accommodate safe walking, biking, and meet the needs of senior citizens and children. 5/10/2021 11:51 AM 10 It would be so nice to see some sort of all inclusive community center in the area, one that caters to all ages. Our youth need a place to be, especially during the colder months. 5/10/2021 8:44 AM 11 Leave the park alone! We do not need housing on our park. If we do not put a community center on the park, then no more buildings. We have enough affordable housing in Richfield. What makes a city vibrant is to have multiple types of residential opportunities.Maybe the city Council should come up with a percentage of how many of each we should have. Use the bell curve. So much high income, so much low income, and the largest amount being middle income. 5/10/2021 7:34 AM 12 I don’t want to see any commercial mix to use housing building in Veterans Memorial Park. A low rise community center perhaps. That park is a jewel and allows people to connect with nature. Keep commercial building, high-rise building, commercial building out of that park. 5/10/2021 7:25 AM 13 If you use large buildings in this area, housing that is too expensive for the young or income lacking, you are going to loose all that this good about this area. Profits over nature will not last and we will looked at being the next Edina which we should do better than Edina b/c we can. 5/9/2021 9:54 PM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 27 / 31 14 The Master Plan for the park has not been to add any residential or commercial facilities. Any uses considered for the American Legion should follow that concept. The use of the space, maybe even the existing building, for an enhanced Community Center would work well 5/9/2021 2:25 PM 15 Thank you for surveying us and working to improve our awesome city.5/9/2021 11:12 AM 16 Please do not build high density housing here, keep it a beautiful peaceful area of Richfield. Let us be the "central park" of the Twin Cities by not selling out to large buildings but keeping our green space 5/9/2021 10:07 AM 17 There must a formula that calculates park size to the number of people that it can substain without reducing the quality of the park 5/9/2021 9:47 AM 18 As noted above, I think Richfield should focus more on property value increasing activities and not about mass housing. One of the great parts about Richfield is we are right next to Minneapolis, Edina, and Bloomington and in many ways, our city is much more affordable than these cities. As with the stock market, you buy and hold. This is how Richfield residents like it. By being adjacent to housing areas with higher property values, you will see gains in value unless the cit of Richfield goes about decreasing that value by eating up single family homes and beautiful parks and replacing with mass housing. 5/8/2021 11:31 PM 19 My concern is that the development of the area in/around the park will compromise the current integrity of the park. The park is a gift in this neighborhood and I would love to maintain the quiet nature-in-the-middle-of-the-city environment. Please be careful in the decisions that will be made. 5/8/2021 7:04 PM 20 Tearing down existing houses to build multi-resident housing would hurt the neighborhoods and detract from the park. 5/8/2021 4:29 PM 21 Do not let any developers ruin Veterans Park the way they are damaging Queen Ave or Sheridan Park. 5/8/2021 4:29 PM 22 This park is a true gem for this part of the area, and it needs to be preserved and not over- built. Plans for all sorts of new buildings will drastically change the feel of the park. There should be phases that are re-considered after the project has begun. Additionally, I would love to see a sound barrier wall along the north side of Veteran's park to block Hwy 62, much like along I-35 through south Minneapolis. 5/8/2021 8:06 AM 23 We strongly encourage this area to expand the park as parkland and not any housing or commercial use. We live along 64th street and traffic already is high along this road. If parkland improvement is not feasible then we would like to see something very low density that would will keep additional traffic down 5/8/2021 8:03 AM 24 The questions were hard to answer because they didn’t allow for my opinion. It was quite obvious that the decision has been made that building development is happening and you have squelched a significant number of honest opinions to be voiced for those who don’t want buildings but want more park space. I’m saddened and disappointed that the city will, once again, say that they gave the public ample opportunities to discuss their ideas, but it won’t matter because of how the city manipulated the peoples responses. I want more park space and for the city to reclaim the buildings like the legion, and the home and the mortuary as they might be available to buy. Once housing goes in, it creeps into the park forever. We need to keep every inch of Park and buffering properties we can. We should not put multi story buildings within sight of the part. When in the park, you should look out to trees or residential lots which also have trees. Not to a retail store or condo full of windows. 5/7/2021 10:25 PM 25 Again, poorly designed survey. Most of the questions are written for the council to interpret that respondents are supporting their Minneapolis-lite agenda. Our council reeks of Met-council stupidity. 5/7/2021 8:33 PM 26 These questions are so poorly worded. It is really hard to understand what is meant by the wording of these questions. Honestly, we have an opportunity as a community to purchase this land and preserve additional acres of the park and make it bigger and better. We will never have this opportunity again to preserve open land and nature in this part of the park and I think the city should purchase this with the public in mind--this is a destination BECAUSE it is a natural area and putting buildings with housing in this area creates a quasi-private feel to the park like it is "owned" and meant mainly for those living in the apartment complex or townhomes. This park is for EVERYBODY and should stay that way. We have enough tall apartment building boxes around Richfield Lake and so do NOT do this to Veteran's Park. 5/7/2021 6:38 PM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 28 / 31 People enjoy watching the fireworks on the fourth of July. A tall building will block the view of everyone living behind this building to the west, and that is sad and unfair to take away the views of such a special part of our city's patriotic celebration. We also like to preserve our sunsets and views without a tall building in the background. Please do NOT put any tall structures here! Perhaps this location could be used to draw more people to Richfield by expanding the city pool to include more water features such as a wave pool, lazy river, islands, obstacle course, and more! Look at what other communities have done with their pool and water areas. We could do SO MUCH! People come from all over, families with small children, school groups, youth, and more, to enjoy a large outdoor pool area and new features keep it exciting and attractive. It is a perfect location with the picnic and play areas and bandshell nearby as well as nature trails and bike trails. THINK of all the wonderful opportunities the city has when it preserves SPACE! Instead of filling it with another apartment building. We have so many already. We don't need to be another metropolis. We need (and LOVE) the small-town feel of our community. We like the quiet streets and small single family homes and neighborhood parks. If we want to add tall apartment buildings, look to our city "center" area, such as the Hub and Lyndale and 66th street where we can create a nicer "downtown" feel, something like Hopkins has done with a historic or vintage look as well as modern. Something like 50th and France, with trendy outdoor areas and shopping. That would be GREAT by the Hub. But NOT by Veteran's Park, which is more of an outdoor, nature-loving destination. If you want to put money into something, add to the park. That is what I think most of us want. Thank you. 27 There is not much crime in this neighborhood now. Please don't invite more crime in by providing a culture where crime thrives. Don't look at this as a way of increasing the tax base by bringing in more people. Look at it as a way to ruin the peace in a peaceful neighborhood. Put bigger buildings around the Hub area, not in people's backyards. 5/7/2021 3:57 PM 28 We’ve leaved here a long time and I’d rather pay higher taxes they ruin our city by adding more housing that always brings more crime to the city. You can get to anything you need quickly currently in Richfield and that’s why we live here and wish to continue to. People who are making this type of decisions normally don’t live in the area they want to change. And most of if not all the changes are only made to increase revenue for the city. I have to live within my budget so the city needs to learn how to do that also. I realize cost go up but it should not happen because city leaders want to make themselves look good 5/7/2021 2:00 PM 29 Thru out this entire study, there has been no " hard facts" in writing as part of this study..about the the Legion and its historical and active involvment in this property's past; and the importance of the Legion to continue in a highly prominent visible building including ensuring the parking needs and every other objective need of the Legion is protected by ordinance. The City has done a fine job of disrespecting the many men and women associated with the Legion and the significant contribution of $$ and service to all nonprofits that provide service to those in need the most. 5/7/2021 10:38 AM 30 Glad Richfield is thinking progressively!! Don’t listen to the nay-sayers on Facebook please, these are all good ideas! 5/7/2021 8:42 AM 31 This is an opportunity to go well beyond what is required by the ADA for accessibility, and truly make accessibility a priority, and not just the bare minimum to be in compliance with the ADA. There should be a Bus drop off area, like a HUB, not just how it is now where the bus just stops in the street. Also there should be a drop off area/s for Metro Mobility and cars to drop off people with disabilities, or who cannot walk far distances. More than one drop off area would be ideal. This is the hardest for seniors and others who cannot walk far distances, when they go to the zoo, the fair, or large parks, and the drop off area is half a mile, or more from where you want to go. We also will need more than one drop off site if you are going to limit parking spots. The ratio required for how many disability parking spots you have to have in relation to the total number of parking spots has not been updated in decades and there are way more people with disabilities now, and the population will continue to grow, due to better medical care, and the Boomers aging. Cutting down on parking spots usually means that people without disabilities are more likely to park in disability spots, which no one ever enforces. What this usually means is that people with disabilities cannot go places during peak times. For example, people with a disabled family member, or senior, knew that they could not go to the mall of america on the weekends unless they got there when they opened their doors because all of the disability parking would be taken. This means no participating in farmers market, big events at the park, etc, You just have to accept that you can't go. If there are good places for bus drop off, and not just in the street the way it is now this would help because it would be easier to take the bus to the park. Small merchants would be great, as a destination, 5/7/2021 12:17 AM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 29 / 31 as well as regular park goers. As far as walking, there is the HUB and Target, and if you live right in the middle of the two it's not as easy to walk to. It would be nice to have some things to walk to in that area. 32 Leave the park alone! Let the legion sell provided the neighboring homes views are not affected. Richfield, come on now, you're already building a TON of apt buildings....finish and FILL those before you start any more! 5/6/2021 11:20 PM 33 I would love to see a splash pad added. There are none in Richfield!5/6/2021 10:40 PM 34 Please leave this park alone. Of you must build more high density homes push it to the Hwy 77 / 494 corridor. 5/6/2021 9:54 PM 35 Keep the American Legion at the park.5/6/2021 9:39 PM 36 The city council will continue to ignore the long term residents until they are held accountable or the community leaves 5/6/2021 9:25 PM 37 Preserve the park and keep the views. By the way, is the bandshell ever going to be used for anything???? I am completely against more housing. 5/6/2021 9:24 PM 38 No high rises.5/6/2021 9:17 PM 39 Building apartments of any kind, especially high density, would take away from the beauty of the park. 5/6/2021 8:58 PM 40 Don’t take single family homes. Richfield will lose its small town feel in a big city 5/6/2021 8:46 PM 41 We the city of Richfield have enough low income apartments, $600-700K condos, old folk homes. Leave the parks alone, the more parks you take away the more people with good income and education will leave. Don't get money hungry, think of it as if you were a kid. Would you rather be able to walk around a nice park not filled with dumb apartments and condos or NATURE. 5/6/2021 8:13 PM 42 Prefer to see the higher volume stay down off of Portland rather than create additional high volume on 66th street as you drive East from Portland 5/6/2021 5:57 PM 43 No new construction, No cutting down trees, No tearing down of any existing homes, No new retail. 5/6/2021 5:48 PM 44 I oppose development on the Veteran's Park site that would be too intensive near a wildlife area. Whatever goes in on the Legion site, I want an environmental impact study conducted. 5/6/2021 5:48 PM 45 DO NOT TAKE ONE FOOT FOR NEW BUILDING CONSTRUCTION UNLESS IT IS DOR A COMMUNITY CENTER OR COMMUNITY HEALTH CLUB. 5/6/2021 5:45 PM 46 Richfield is turning into downtown Minneapolis and taking all open spaces and building high rises. It will soon no longer be the Urban Hometown and be an extension of Minneapolis. Not what I signed up for when becoming a resident. 5/6/2021 5:10 PM 47 Don't bastardize this space to make a buck.5/6/2021 4:53 PM 48 I want to see development of a disc-golf course in one of our parks. Maybe Veterans park is suitable. If you are not the right person to consider this, would you please pass the request on to someone who is? Thank you in advance. 5/6/2021 4:13 PM 49 I strongly oppose buildings in this area, particularly tall ones that will shade the pool and open recreation areas. Our parks and the open space they provide are the gems of Richfield. Leave them alone 5/6/2021 3:57 PM 50 Please stop trying to develop Richfield into a densely populated neighborhood with businesses and housing stacked on top of each other for miles. Your residents like having safe neighborhoods and good roads and we love our parks...but we are not South Minneapolis or Edina and don’t want to be! Listen to your constituents and stop trying to make Richfield more populous!! 5/6/2021 3:15 PM 51 I’m disappointed in the wording of these questions. They are worded in such a way to stimulate positive response to building businesses and high density housing in veteran’s park. I expect surveys to be written impartially. It’s a park with forest, swamps and animals. This should not be “redeveloped” with said items. There is sufficient access already from almost all sides. I can’t imagine veteran’s park with “views” of high density housing, no matter how architecturally 5/6/2021 3:09 PM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 30 / 31 pleasing. The increase in traffic, construction, noise will obviously negatively impact Veterans park. The wording of these questions are obviously leading. I expect civil servants to listen to the community rather than influence it. 52 Please do not put high or medium density in this area. Expand the facilities that we already have e.g. the park and pool. 5/6/2021 2:36 PM 53 Please just stop the high density, multi story development on the borders and all of the main corridors throughout Richfield...enough already 5/6/2021 2:16 PM 54 Do not tear down any houses along 11th Avenue, 66th or Portland. We do not want apartments, condo, townhomes built near or in the park. This will take away from the park. Veterans Park is not a premier destination. It is used as a quiet park for residents living near the park and for those who want to drive a short distance to get to the park. The VFW does need to be cleaned up and something could be built in that location that would add to the amenities of the park. Housing would not add to the park amentities. 5/6/2021 2:00 PM 55 STOP TAKING HOMES FROM FAMILIES FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR. STOP BUILDING. NOTHING HAS BEEN FINISHED OR MAINTAINED IN YEARS. 5/6/2021 1:36 PM 56 Not like you'll listen anyway, but you already have several unfinished gigantic high density housing projects in progress. We have not yet seen the impact on schools, roads, parks, etc, yet you want to forge ahead on introducing even MORE. Richfield is a first ring suburb, not Minneapolis proper. "The Urban Hometown" Richfield touts as a motto is steadily being stolen from its residents by greedy city planners and government officials. Our schools aren't even rated in the upper half of the state, but tax reductions are being given to commercial apartment developers constantly. Residents in single family homes have 6+ story apartments towering over their backyards, taking away their privacy, reducing their property's total value (because no one wants to live where there is no parking and people can watch every move you make on your own property), and Richfield just keeps approving these projects. If you want high density housing so badly, focus on actual high density areas--the hub sits as a largely empty parking lot and an empty grocery store, and is an an area where high density housing makes sense. Instead, you plan to overshadow large portions of the park with a tall apartment building, and add hundreds of vehicle and residential traffic which will have a negative effect on the wildlife that makes Veteran's Memorial Park their home. The bright, sunny areas of the pool and park where existing citizens enjoyed spending their summer days will be shaded and overcrowded and apartment residents who didn't want to pay for parking spots will crowd the lots at the park and ice arena. Furthermore, your plan appears to include taking existing single family homes, driving more and more residents away. Yes, there is a shortage of affordable housing. No, many of those people don't want to live in yet another cookie cutter generic apartment. They want single family homes they can afford and can use to build wealth and community roots. Please don't do this plan. If private development MUST come to the former site of the Legion, please make it a low level multipurpose construction. Perhaps retail or community use rooms on the first floor and a max of two levels of housing above. No high density housing in this area! 5/6/2021 1:35 PM 57 Keep the legion and the atmosphere there. We don’t need it to look like the new weird condos next to target that stand out like sore thumbs. Keep the legion and little Vegas! 5/6/2021 1:30 PM 58 I'm in my 30th year of living in this neighborhood and homes were eliminated when the roundabout was put in at 66th & Portland. I am retired now and sincerely hope homes on Oakland Avenue will not be eliminated like they were on Portland (directly behind my house on the West side). 5/6/2021 1:25 PM 59 Please keep the open feeling around this park. Do not reduce open space 5/6/2021 1:22 PM 60 According to the post card sent to residents near Vets, it appears residential homes on 66th between portland & 12th will be removed and low density housing & shops will be added. This makes NO sense & is very upsetting to current residents! Why not put that money into updating the old, unkept, commercial buildings along 66th from 12th ave to Richfield Pkwy?? Vets park is beautiful, adding buildings and low density living to the south side ( where homes currently are) would distract from the peacefulness of the area. In the 35 years I have lived in Richfield, far too many family & friends were forced to move from their beloved homes (Best Buy area, Target area, Chamberin apt area). As with the developments, just listed, the city 'heard' concerns from the residents, but went ahead and did it anyways....which makes surveys like this pointless. 5/6/2021 1:05 PM PORTLAND AND 66TH SUB-AREA STUDY 31 / 31 61 When you ask these questions do you even care to read the comments? It is already a done deal go-ahead slam HD housing and make it all section 42 housing. 5/6/2021 11:21 AM 62 I am a long-time Richfield resident (over 40 years) but when I was in a west-Metro suburb, my mom still lived here (before I came back). I think any type of a multi story unit would be a bad move for that area, and would encourage more crime. Look at the high-rise buildings and the crime they bring in Minneapolis. People see those opportunities, and there is easy access to that area for those people. That is just one reason but a key one. 5/6/2021 11:11 AM 63 Please stop tearing down single family homes. It's already hard enough to find something affordable. 5/6/2021 11:07 AM 64 The recent changes to Richfield has destroyed the charm and character of the city. Have you never noticed that high density brings crime? And Richfield has more than it's fair share of both. 5/6/2021 11:05 AM 65 We have enough redevelopment that includes apartments & condos. What we need is to focus on the business still in our city 5/6/2021 10:56 AM 66 I know it’s been recently voted down, but this is our city’s chance to utilize the vacancy of the Legion site, in combination with the structures already present in the area (park, lake, pavilion, pool, ice arena, band shell) to create a community center in the city that meets the needs of residents in a way that the current building at Augsburg has never been able to do. How much private investor funds are needed to persuade city leadership to move forward with such a thing? I’ll raise the money! I’m here to talk whenever: BJ Skoog // beejskoog@gmail.com 5/6/2021 10:53 AM 67 No high rise structures taller than 3 stories 5/6/2021 10:46 AM 68 Keep in mind people use this space to peacefully enjoy the environment (open green space of the large park, community—farmers market/bandshell/pool, enjoying wildlife) in a city already filled with noise and lights due to its proximity to Minneapolis and the airport and highways. Anything that will contribute to maintaining Veterans Park as that peaceful oasis much like Woodlake should be encouraged. 5/6/2021 10:43 AM 69 Building apartments that will not be affordable around a perfectly good neighborhood is not a good idea. I don’t live in that neighborhood but I would be furious if everything in the plan would happen by my house 5/6/2021 10:24 AM 70 Having a large apartment building in the same block as better and park, especially in Portland is going to increase accidents and reduce traffic flow. An apartment building that is tall, will not fit in with the other buildings in the area. This would take away from the parks ascetic, make the park more busy, increase potential crime, and increase garbage, debris and cleanliness of the park. 5/6/2021 10:24 AM 71 Don’t build up around the park, it will lose the neighborhood feel.5/6/2021 10:21 AM 72 I am not sure why more housing and commercial projects need to be done along Portland when there are already some strips of vacant businesses along that road and there are unfinished housing projects in development. I think more areas of the park should be dedicated to prairie restoration 5/6/2021 10:04 AM 73 This is absurd! Stop overpopulating a green space and stop taking people's homes. Very bad idea and bad for the environment 5/6/2021 9:59 AM 74 Would love more food/drink options near the park - a brewery, patio restaurant, anything like that. Today many of the dining options in Richfield feel disconnected from the vibrant natural spaces we have in Richfield - we can *either* go to the park or go to eat, but never both. A model that comes to mind is Sea Salt restaurant in Minnehaha park. Provide more opportunity to help people *stay* in the park, not just come visit for an hour and need to leave at lunchtime, or rely on bringing their own food - it would help establish the park as a Third Place (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place) IMO. 5/6/2021 9:58 AM 75 Leave Vets Park, and the corridor and single family homes alone. Bad planning has already destroyed much of Richfield. Just stop! 5/6/2021 9:54 AM 76 I firmly believe we need a bigger community center such as what Shoreview or Eden Prairie has. This would be such a wonderful addition to Richfield. 5/6/2021 9:48 AM JUNE 2021 25 ATTACHMENT C - SITE CAPACITY STUDY 6’ 6’ 10’ LandscapingSidewalkSidewalk LandscapingPortland Ave TownhomesPorch 8’ 4’ 26’ Trail Boulevard Existing Road 8’46’24’ Trail Stormwater Feature 30’34’44’ Apartments/Condos Common PlazaAmerican Legion Patio Apartments/Condos The Legion Below-ground Parking Below-ground Parking Courtyard Amenity Space 65’75’40’42’60’ 14’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ Concept 1 Section | American Legion Site Redevelopment 5’ 10’ 20’50’ ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 FeetConcept 1 Design Assumptions Additional access is provided (e.g., right-in/right-out) onto Portland Avenue south of the site Enhanced pedestrian connections are provided to and from the site Pedestrian plaza and outdoor seating Building 1 (5 to 6 stories and approx. 75 to 160 units*) Building 2 (5 to 6 stories – approx. 85 to 200 units*) Surface Parking: 26-72 spaces Under Building Parking: 192-258 spaces (1 or 2 levels) Base Design Assumptions North/south pedestrian connections between the site, pool, and the Veterans memorial Vehicle access is located north of the site on Portland Avenue (trafﬁc control TBD) Surface parking is provided to accommodate American Legion guests and Veterans memorial visitors Ground level or underground parking is provided for residents Stormwater management (ponding) is designed to be a site amenity and serve as a buffer between development and the ice arena Trees are preserved to the north between the parking lot and Veterans memorial * Unit ranges based on 1,000 sf – 800 sf average unit size / each individual ﬂoor plate P Common Plaza Private Courtyard LegionwithPatio Stormwater R-I / R-O Full Access Walk-up Units Below-ground Building 1 Building 2 Connection to Memorial Connection to Park Fire Access Drive Connection to Pool Connection to Ice Arena Parking Access Drive Surface Lot P CARRY SECTION CUT DOWN TO SHOW ELEVATION Concept 1 Design Assumptions » Retain access (e.g., right-in/right-out) onto Portland Avenue south of the site » Enhanced pedestrian/bicycle connections are provided to and through the site » Pedestrian plaza and outdoor seating » Building 1 -5 stories, 75 to 127 units* » Building 2 -5 stories, 85 to 165 units* » Surface Parking: 26-72 +/- spaces » Enclosed Parking: 192 +/- spaces (1 level) Base Design Assumptions » North/south bike and pedestrian connections between the site, pool, and the Veterans memorial »East/west bike and pedestrian connections » Vehicle access to/from Portland Avenue is shifted north on site (traffic control TBD) » Surface parking is provided to accommodate American Legion guests and Veterans Memorial visitors » Enclosed parking is provided for residents » Outdoor open space requirement of 300 sf/unit, with potential of 150 sf being provided by individual balconies and porches » Maximum lot coverage of 30% » Stormwater management (ponding) is designed to be a site amenity and serve as a buffer between development and the ice arena » Trees are preserved to the north between the parking lot and Veterans memorial * Unit ranges based on 1,000 sf – 800 sf average unit size / each individual floor plate American Legion Site: Concept 1 6’ 6’ 10’ LandscapingSidewalkSidewalk LandscapingPortland Ave TownhomesPorch 8’ 4’ 26’ Trail Boulevard Existing Road 8’46’24’ Trail Stormwater Feature 30’34’44’ Apartments/Condos Common PlazaAmerican Legion Patio Apartments/Condos The Legion Below-ground Parking Below-ground Parking Courtyard Amenity Space 65’75’40’42’60’ 14’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ Concept 1 Section | American Legion Site Redevelopment 5’ 10’ 20’50’ 6’ 6’ 10’ LandscapingSidewalkSidewalkPortland Ave TownhomesPorch 8’ 4’ 26’ TrailBoulevard Existing Road 48’16’ Sidewalk Drive with Parking Stormwater Feature 42’34’44’ Apartments/CondosApartments/Condos American Legion American Legion Patio Apartments/Condos Apartments/Condos Below-ground Parking Courtyard Amenity Space 56’60’62’105’ 14’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 5’ 10’ 20’50’ Concept 2 Section | American Legion Site Redevelopment Below-ground Parking ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 Feet ´0 200Feet P P P P P Concept 2 Design Assumptions Additional access is provided (e.g., right-in/right-out) onto Portland Avenue south of the site Limited pedestrian plaza space and outdoor seating Enhanced trafﬁc circulation and additional surface parking is provided onsite Building 1 (Veterans Housing) (5 stories and approx. 95 to 125 units) Building 2 (Market Rate) (5 stories – approx. 85 to 105 units) Surface Parking: 88 spaces Under Building Parking: 68 spaces Base Design Assumptions North/south pedestrian connections between the site, pool, and the Veterans memorial Vehicle access is located north of the site on Portland Avenue (trafﬁc control TBD) Surface parking is provided to accommodate American Legion guests and Veterans memorial visitors Ground level or underground parking is provided for residents Stormwater management (ponding) is designed to be a site amenity and serve as a buffer between development and the ice arena Trees are preserved to the north between the parking lot and Veterans memorial * Unit ranges based on 1,000 sf – 800 sf average unit size / each individual ﬂoor plate Walk-up Units Connection to Memorial Connection to Park Connection to Pool Connection to Ice Arena Private Courtyard Stormwater Building 1 Building 2 Surface Lot LegionPatio Legion Below-ground PBelow-ground P Connection to Memorial R-I / R-O Full Access CARRY SECTION CUT DOWN TO SHOW ELEVATION Concept 2 Design Assumptions » Retain access (e.g., right-in/right-out) onto Portland Avenue south of the site » Limited pedestrian plaza space and outdoor seating » Enhanced traffic circulation and additional surface parking is provided onsite » Building 1 (Veterans Housing) -5 stories , 95 to 125 units* » Building 2 (Market Rate) -5 stories, 85 to 105 units* » Surface Parking: 88 +/- spaces » Enclosed Parking: 68 +/- spaces Base Design Assumptions » North/south bike and pedestrian connections between the site, pool, and the Veterans memorial »East/west bike and pedestrian connections » Vehicle access to/from Portland Avenue is shifted north on site (traffic control TBD) » Surface parking is provided to accommodate American Legion guests and Veterans Memorial visitors » Enclosed parking is provided for residents » Outdoor open space requirement of 300 sf/unit, with potential of 150 sf being provided by individual balconies and porches » Maximum lot coverage of 30% » Stormwater management (ponding) is designed to be a site amenity and serve as a buffer between development and the ice arena » Trees are preserved to the north between the parking lot and Veterans memorial * Unit ranges based on 1,000 sf – 800 sf average unit size / each individual floor plateAmerican Legion Site: Concept 2 6’ 6’ 10’ LandscapingSidewalkSidewalkPortland Ave TownhomesPorch 8’ 4’ 26’ TrailBoulevard Existing Road 48’16’ Sidewalk Drive with Parking Stormwater Feature 42’34’44’ Apartments/CondosApartments/Condos American Legion American Legion Patio Apartments/Condos Apartments/Condos Below-ground Parking Courtyard Amenity Space 56’60’62’105’ 14’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 5’ 10’ 20’50’ Concept 2 Section | American Legion Site Redevelopment Below-ground Parking 6’ 6’ LandscapingSidewalk SidewalkSidewalkPortland Ave 8’ 4’ 26’ TrailBoulevard Existing Road 42’19’12’ Sidewalk Drive with Parking Stormwater Feature 52’28’44’ Apartments/CondosApartments/Condos American Legion American Legion American Legion Patio32’ Apartments/Condos Below-ground Parking Courtyard Amenity Space 52’48’ Apartments/Condos 48’62’66’ 14’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 5’ 10’ 20’50’ Concept 3 Section | American Legion Site Redevelopment Below-ground Parking ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 Feet ´0 200 Feet ´0 200Feet Below-ground P Below-ground P P P P P Concept 3 Design Assumptions Redevelopment includes other properties in the NE quadrant Limited surface parking for American Legion guests and Veterans memorial visitors Vehicular drop-off zone Enhanced trafﬁc circulation and additional surface parking is provided between the site, pool, and ice arena Building 1 (6 stories and approx. 75 to 90 units) Building 2 (6 stories – approx. 250 to 310 units) Surface Parking: 52 spaces Under Building Parking: 216 spaces Base Design Assumptions North/south pedestrian connections between the site, pool, and the Veterans memorial Vehicle access is located north of the site on Portland Avenue (trafﬁc control TBD) Surface parking is provided to accommodate American Legion guests and Veterans memorial visitors Ground level or underground parking is provided for residents Stormwater management (ponding) is designed to be a site amenity and serve as a buffer between development and the ice arena Trees are preserved to the north between the parking lot and Veterans memorial * Unit ranges based on 1,000 sf – 800 sf average unit size / each individual ﬂoor plate Connection to Park Connection to Pool Surface LotExpansion Connection to Ice Arena Private Courtyard Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Legion Plaza Connection to MemorialConnection to Memorial Stormwater New Street New Street Commercial R-I / R-O Full Access CARRY SECTION CUT DOWN TO SHOW ELEVATIONAmerican Legion Site: Concept 3 Concept 3 Design Assumptions » Redevelopment includes other properties in the NE quadrant » Surface parking for American Legion guests and Veterans memorial visitors relocated to the interior of the site » Vehicular drop-off zone » Enhanced traffic circulation and additional surface parking is provided between the site, pool, and ice arena » Building 1 -5 stories, 50 to 75 units* » Building 2 -5 stories, 209 to 240 units* » Surface Parking: 52 +/- spaces » Enclosed Parking: 216 +/- spaces Base Design Assumptions » North/south bike and pedestrian connections between the site, pool, and the Veterans memorial »East/west bike and pedestrian connections » Vehicle access to/from Portland Avenue is shifted north on site (traffic control TBD) » Surface parking is provided to accommodate American Legion guests and Veterans Memorial visitors » Enclosed parking is provided for residents » Outdoor open space requirement of 300 sf/unit, with potential of 150 sf being provided by individual balconies and porches » Maximum lot coverage of 30% » Stormwater management (ponding) is designed to be a site amenity and serve as a buffer between development and the ice arena » Trees are preserved to the north between the parking lot and Veterans memorial * Unit ranges based on 1,000 sf – 800 sf average unit size / each individual floor plate 6’ 6’ LandscapingSidewalk SidewalkSidewalkPortland Ave 8’ 4’ 26’ TrailBoulevard Existing Road 42’19’12’ Sidewalk Drive with Parking Stormwater Feature 52’28’44’ Apartments/CondosApartments/Condos American Legion American Legion American Legion Patio32’ Apartments/Condos Below-ground Parking Courtyard Amenity Space 52’48’ Apartments/Condos 48’62’66’ 14’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 5’ 10’ 20’50’ Concept 3 Section | American Legion Site Redevelopment Below-ground Parking 6RXUFH(VUL0D[DU*HR(\H(DUWKVWDU*HRJUDSKLFV&1(6$LUEXV'686'$86*6$HUR*5,',*1DQGWKH*,68VHU&RPPXQLW\ 0 160 32080US Feet ´0 500 FeetLegend Project Boundary Project Boundary Parcels P P BRT Bus Stop Treeline Buffer Stormwater Connect Surface Lots in Second PhasePhased Townhome Developments R-I / R-O Full Access Southeast Quadrant Redevelopment: Concept 1 6RXUFH(VUL0D[DU*HR(\H(DUWKVWDU*HRJUDSKLFV&1(6$LUEXV'686'$86*6$HUR*5,',*1DQGWKH*,68VHU&RPPXQLW\ 0 160 32080US Feet ´0 500FeetLegendProject BoundaryProject BoundaryParcels BRT Bus Stop Treeline Buffer Stormwater Stormwater 28 Units on 2 Floors Underground Parking (1 space /unit) 20 Units on 2 Floors Full Access R-I / R-O 6RXUFH(VUL0D[DU*HR(\H(DUWKVWDU*HRJUDSKLFV&1(6$LUEXV'686'$86*6$HUR*5,',*1DQGWKH*,68VHU&RPPXQLW\ 0 160 32080US Feet ´0 500FeetLegendProject BoundaryProject Boundary Parcels PPBRT Bus Stop Treeline BufferStormwaterConnect Surface Lots in Second PhasePhased Townhome DevelopmentsR-I / R-O Full Access Southeast Quadrant Redevelopment: Concept 2 ´0 500 FeetLegend Project Boundary Project Boundary Parcels Medium-density Residential Inﬁll Examples along 66th Full Access Full Block with Staggered Parcels 66th Street Side StreetSide StreetSide Street66th Street Full Block with In-line Parcels Half Block Full Access Full Access Framework Assumptions » As properties become available for purchase, in the case of willing sellers, redevelop single family homes so that they are in line with the recommended medium-density residential zoning » Preserve existing high quality trees where possible » Access from side streets (not off of 66th Street) » New residences front 66th Street where possible and keep parking in the rear (surface or attached) » 3-story maximum height (to match existing MDR) » Provide a buffer to existing residential homes PORTLAND & 66TH SUB AREA STUDYCITY OF RICHFIELD, MN26 ATTACHMENT D - VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF A CONCEPTUAL 5 STORY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT JUNE 2021 27 ATTACHMENT E - PROPOSED OVERLAY DISTRICT LANGUAGE 541.25. – Veteran’s Park Area Overlay District. Subdivision 1. Purpose and intent. The Veteran’s Park Area Overlay District promotes both redevelopment of existing structures and new development to provide a balanced mix of compatible uses in proximity to the Veterans Memorial Park. Design regulations are provided to produce structures of consistent character and of appropriate scale that transition from single family residential to higher density mixed use and community commercial. The intent of the Overlay District is to guide the design character of redevelopment and revitalization in ways that are sensitive to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and its surrounding land uses, while adhering to the Portland Avenue and 66th Street Sub Area Study’s Development Principles:  Personal Connections: Support redevelopment projects that preserves and enhances the ability of residents and users of Veterans Memorial Park to make personal connections to the park.  Park & Neighborhood Connectivity: Increase connectivity to Veterans Memorial Park by incorporating vehicle, pedestrian, wheelchair/walker, and bicycle connections between park destinations (e.g., the Memorial, lake, ice arena, and swimming pool), neighborhoods, and redevelopment sites along Portland Avenue and 66th Street.  Diversify Housing Options: Use redevelopment sites to expand the mix of housing in the area such as row/townhouse, affordable units, courtyard apartments, courtyard cottages, and live-work units.  Convenient Commercial: Encourage a mix of community and small neighborhood commercial businesses in proximity to residential areas and the park destinations as an important amenity for residents and park visitors.  Sustainable Development: Use sustainable design practices and new technology in developments that will help create a healthy, sustainable, vibrant neighborhood, and contribute to the park environment.  Building Transition: Require site design and building architectural characteristics that provide appropriate transitions between single family residential neighborhoods and higher intensity uses.  Building Heights: Locate the tallest portions of buildings away from adjacent low density residences. For sites adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park, locate the tallest portions of buildings away from the park’s open areas.  Building Massing: Locate and design buildings to preserve views to/from the park’s open areas and minimize potential shadowing of the park.  Quantity of Parking: Minimize parking needs by leveraging the study area’s location along multimodal corridors to reduce the use of the automobile, while minimizing neighborhood impacts. Subd. 2. Creation of district and applicability. The Veteran’s Park Area Overlay (VPA) District shall apply to properties designated within Appendix I of this Code. Subd. 3. Applicable regulations. All permitted, accessory, and conditional uses allowed in the underlying Districts shall be allowed in the VPA Overlay District with the following additions, qualifications, and/or exceptions: The following abbreviations are used below: Permitted use - P Accessory use – A Conditional use - C  MR-3 in the VPA Overlay District: o Offices and clinics - A o Restaurant Class I (serving alcohol) – A/C o Restaurant Class II (traditional/cafeteria) - A o Restaurant Class IV (take out only) - A o Retail services, general - A o Retail services, neighborhood – A o Taproom/cocktail room – A/C o Additions for accessory uses:  All accessory uses shall be contained within the principal residential building.  All accessory uses shall have street frontage.  All accessory uses shall be located on the ground floor and shall not exceed 15,000 square feet.  C-2 in the VPA Overlay District: o Assisted living facilities, nursing or rest homes above ground floor commercial - P o Dwelling, multifamily above ground floor commercial - P o Live-work units above ground floor commercial - P Subd. 4. Bulk and dimensional standards. All bulk and dimensional standards applicable in the underlying districts, as found in Subsections 525.11 (MR-2), 527.11 (MR-3), and 534.11 (C-2) of this Code, shall apply in the VPA Overlay District with the following additions, qualifications, and/or exceptions: a) MR-2 in the VPA Overlay District:  Front yard setback: The minimum front yard setback shall be 10 feet and the maximum shall be 25 feet along.  Parking shall be located in the rear and/or side yards of the building. b) MR-3 in the VPA Overlay District:  Building height: The principal building heights shall be a minimum of 20 feet and up to a maximum of 55 feet or 5 stories, whichever is less. o Building heights shall be measured from the building footprint’s average ground level elevation. o Floors above the third floor shall be stepped back a minimum of 15 feet when adjacent to public streets and public land. Step backs may be adjusted depending on specific site conditions and building placements.  Maximum building coverage: 40%  Front yard setback: The minimum front yard setback shall be 15 feet and the maximum shall be 25 feet.  Rear and side yard setbacks: When adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park, the required rear and side yard setbacks shall prioritize greenspace and landscaping as a transition/buffer to the Park. c) C-2 in the VPA Overlay District:  Front yard setback: The minimum front yard setback shall be 15 feet and the maximum shall be 25 feet.  Rear and side yard setbacks: When adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park, the required rear and side yard setbacks shall prioritize greenspace and landscaping as a transition/buffer to the Park.  Parking shall be located in the rear and/or side yards of the building. Subd. 5. Other performance standards. All additional performance standards applicable in underlying districts shall apply in the VPA District with the following additions, qualifications, and/or exceptions: a) MR-2 in the VPA Overlay District:  A minimum of one primary building entrance shall face Portland Avenue or 66th Street depending on where the property is located.  Projects facing Veteran’s Park: New projects or projects involving the addition of more than 50% of the existing square footage of a building, shall submit a Bird Collision Reduction Plan as part of their development application. b) MR-3 in the VPA Overlay District:  Residential development shall include a minimum of two types of residential land uses that expand the variety of lifecycle housing options in the study area.  A lot larger than two (2) acres is allowed to include a second building. o The two buildings shall be grouped into a single polygon to assess compliance with required setbacks.  Existing trees shall be protected and preserved to the greatest degree possible.  Pedestrian facilities shall be placed along the site’s perimeter to provide walking connections between the public street and public amenities such as Veterans Memorial Park.  Stormwater shall be managed onsite by using best management practices, such as raingardens, green roofs, and bio-infiltration swales to create aesthetically pleasing and useable public spaces or underground systems.  Sites north of 66th Street shall plan internal traffic circulation to accommodate the potential for a north-south road (an approximate extension of Oakland Avenue) that would connect the sites to 66th Street.  A shadow study shall be required as part of the development review process to evaluate potential impacts of shadowing on adjacent properties, measured by the sun’s position at the time of the summer solstice.  A minimum of one primary building entrance is required on each street façade and at least one building entrance every 75 feet of each street façade.  Projects facing Veteran’s Park: New projects or projects involving the addition of more than 50% of the existing square footage of a building, shall submit a Bird Collision Reduction Plan as part of their development application. c) C-2 in the VPA Overlay District:  Existing trees shall be protected and preserved to the greatest degree possible.  Pedestrian facilities shall be placed along the site’s perimeter to provide walking connections between the public street and public amenities such as, Veterans Memorial Park.  Sites north of 66th Street shall plan internal traffic circulation to accommodate the potential for a north-south road (an approximate extension of Oakland Avenue) that would connect the sites to 66th Street.  Stormwater shall be managed onsite by using best management practices, such as raingardens, green roofs, and bio-infiltration swales to create aesthetically pleasing and useable public spaces or underground systems.  Projects facing Veteran’s Park: New projects or projects involving the addition of more than 50% of the existing square footage of a building, shall submit a Bird Collision Reduction Plan as part of their development application. AMERICAN LEGION SITE Affordable Housing Development 6501 Portland Avenue South Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 Hand-Sketched Ground View from Portland Ave Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 The Site - Full Context Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 Site Diagram Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 Site Perspectives - Aerial Views Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 ZONING DATA LOT AREA Parcel 4.16 Acres (181,044.26 SF) Zoning District High-density residential (MR-3) Overlay Veteran’s Park area overlay Building Setbacks Front 15’-0” min, 25’-0” max Side 30’ or the height of the building, whichever is greater Rear 35’-0” or the height of the building, whichever is greater Side and rear setbacks adjacent to Veteran’s Park shall prioritize greenscape. Minimum Lot Coverage:40% (principal structure) Height 20’ min, 55’ max (or 5 stories, whichever is less) measured from avarage grade plane elevation Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. | Architectural Site Plan RICHFIELD, MN | 05.14.2025 | M#24-244 N 0 50 100 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 1 - PARK CONNECTION2 - WALK UP UNIT PATIOS3 - PICKLEBALL COURT4 - PLAY AREA5 - AMENITY PATIO6- COMMUNITY GARDEN7- PET RELIEF AREA KEY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 5 Site Plan - Enlarged Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 PROJECT DATA PHASE 1 Building SF 215,000 SF Unit Count 177 Parking 129 Surface 31 Underground 98 PHASE 2 Building SF 150,000 SF Unit Count 152 Parking 98 Surface 33 Underground 65 OVERALL Building SF 365,000 SF Unit Count 329 Parking 227 Surface 64 Underground 163 ZONING DATA LOT AREA Parcel 4.16 Acres (181,044.26 SF) Zoning District High-density residential (MR-3) Overlay Veteran’s Park area overlay Building Setbacks Front 15’-0” min, 25’-0” max Side 30’ or the height of the building, whichever is greater Rear 35’-0” or the height of the building, whichever is greater Side and rear setbacks adjacent to Veteran’s Park shall prioritize greenscape. Minimum Lot Coverage:40% (principal structure) Height 20’ min, 55’ max (or 5 stories, whichever is less) measured from avarage grade plane elevation 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SURFACE PARKING PICKLEBALL COURT SURFACE PARKING PORTLAND AVECONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK CONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK PLAY AREA PATIO PATIO SETBACK 30'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"MIN 15'-0" MAX 25'-0" WALK UP UNIT PATIOS UTILITY 14'-0" LOBBY LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - GROUND FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY GROUND FLOOR - UC LAYOUT LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF) ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY: VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAXSIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT: 20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 177PARKING: 129SURFACE: 31 UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98 SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALLBUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329 PARKING: 227SURFACE: 64UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA Property line 14’ from curb Phase 1Phase 2 Ground Floor 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SURFACE PARKING PICKLEBALL COURT SURFACE PARKING PORTLAND AVECONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK CONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK PLAY AREA PATIO PATIO SETBACK 30'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"MIN 15'-0" MAX 25'-0" WALK UP UNIT PATIOS UTILITY 14'-0" LOBBY LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - GROUND FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY GROUND FLOOR - UC LAYOUT LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF)ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY:VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAXSIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT:20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 177PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALLBUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64 UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT PHASE 1 PHASE 2 D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - TYPICAL FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 05/14/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY 1" = 30'-0"A-0061TYPICAL FLOOR 2-5 LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF) ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY:VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAX SIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT:20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 177PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31 UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2BUILDING SF: 150,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALL BUILDING SF: 365,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 329 PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA Phase 1Phase 2 PROJECT DATA PHASE 1 Building SF 215,000 SF Unit Count 177 Parking 129 Surface 31 Underground 98 PHASE 2 Building SF 150,000 SF Unit Count 152 Parking 98 Surface 33 Underground 65 OVERALL Building SF 365,000 SF Unit Count 329 Parking 227 Surface 64 Underground 163 Typical Floors (2-5) 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SURFACE PARKING PICKLEBALL COURT SURFACE PARKING PORTLAND AVECONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK CONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK PLAY AREA PATIO PATIO SETBACK 30'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"MIN 15'-0" MAX 25'-0" WALK UP UNIT PATIOS UTILITY 14'-0" LOBBY LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - GROUND FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY GROUND FLOOR - UC LAYOUT LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF)ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY:VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAXSIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT:20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 177PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALLBUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64 UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT PHASE 1PHASE 2 D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - PARKING RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY 1" = 30'-0"A-0081 P1 - UC LAYOUT PARKING LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF) ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY:VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAX SIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT: 20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1 BUILDING SF: 215,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 177 PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31 UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 152 PARKING: 98 SURFACE: 33 UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALL BUILDING SF: 365,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 329 PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64 UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA PROJECT DATA PHASE 1 Building SF 215,000 SF Unit Count 177 Parking 129 Surface 31 Underground 98 PHASE 2 Building SF 150,000 SF Unit Count 152 Parking 98 Surface 33 Underground 65 OVERALL Building SF 365,000 SF Unit Count 329 Parking 227 Surface 64 Underground 163 Phase 1Phase 2 3 BED UNIT 2 BED UNIT 1 BED UNIT STUDIO UNIT AMENITY CIRCULATION OUTDOOR AMENITY 4 BED UNIT PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SURFACE PARKING PICKLEBALL COURT SURFACE PARKING PORTLAND AVECONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK CONNECTION TO VETERAN'S PARK PLAY AREA PATIO PATIO SETBACK 30'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK50'-0"BUILDING HEIGHT = SETBACK60'-0"MIN 15'-0" MAX 25'-0" WALK UP UNIT PATIOS UTILITY 14'-0" LOBBY LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY D E S I G NGROUP C:\Users\gnorris\Documents\Revit Locals\2025-02-19 - The Machine_LupeAm. Legion Richfield_R23_gnorrisXDDUA.rvt LUPE DEVELOPMENT - AMERICAN LEGION SITE - RICHFIELD | SITE ANALYSIS - GROUND FLOOR RICHFIELD, MN | 06/02/25 | M24-244 PLAN KEY GROUND FLOOR - UC LAYOUT LOT AREA: PARCEL: 4.16 ACRES (181,044.26 SF)ZONING DISTRICT:HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (MR-3) OVERLAY:VETERAN'S PARK AREA OVERLAY BUILDING SETBACKS:FRONT: 15'-0" MIN, 25'-0" MAXSIDE: 30' OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER REAR: 35'-0" OR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS ADJACENT TO VETERAN'S PARK SHALL PRIORITIZE GREENSCAPE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 40% (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) HEIGHT:20' MIN, 55' MAX (OR 5 STORIES, WHICHEVER IS LESS) MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION. ZONING DATA PHASE 1BUILDING SF: 215,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 177PARKING: 129 SURFACE: 31UNDERGROUND: 98 PHASE 2 BUILDING SF: 150,000 SF UNIT COUNT: 152PARKING: 98SURFACE: 33UNDERGROUND: 65 OVERALLBUILDING SF: 365,000 SFUNIT COUNT: 329PARKING: 227 SURFACE: 64 UNDERGROUND: 163 PROJECT DATA Parking Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 Hand-Sketched Rendering View from Veteran’s Memorial Park Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 Hand-Sketched Rendering Park Bird’s Eye View Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 - Intergenerational campus offering 195 total units of affordable housing. - Brings much-needed affordable housing to the neighborhood, and bridges this need by accommodating various demographics including aging seniors, entry-level workers, and families. - Close proximity to transit, jobs, retail and services. Parking Stalls: 111 stalls, 0.56 ratio Snelling Yards Affordable Housing & the Hillock (Minneapolis, MN) The Flats at Malcolm Yards (Minneapolis, MN) 550 W. Lake Street Apartments, AKA the Lakefield (Minneapolis, MN) - Project brings 110 total units of affordable housing to Minneapolis’ Lyn-Lake neighborhood as part of broader mixed-income housing campus. - Close proximity to transit, jobs, retail and services. Parking Stalls: 62 stalls, 0.56 ratio - 143-unit income-qualified apartment within Malcolm Yards community - All units at 60% medium income or less, & 16 units of supportive housing for those at immediate risk of homelessness - Amenities: sky deck community room, rooftop patio with grill station, fitness center, pet wash, EV parking stations, bike storage, etc. Parking Stalls: 57 stalls, 0.4 ratio Lupe Development Experience Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 - 118-unit affordable 55+ apartment community, filling a gap within an otherwise high-rent district. - Studio, 1- and 2-bedroom units at or below 30%-80% AMI. - Redevelopment of vacant site walkable to nearby neighborhoods, transit, medical, & retail amenities. Parking Stalls: 93 stalls, 0.8 ratio Forty-Forty Flats (Edina, MN) Wirth on the Woods Campus, the Eloise & the Theodore (Minneapolis, MN) - 200 total 55+ units (100 senior affordable, 100 senior market-rate) in Bryn Mawr neighborhood. - 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units. Parking Stalls: 50 stalls (The Theodore (Affordable), 0.50 ratio), 100 stalls (The Eloise, shared) Lupe Development Experience Lupe Development - 6501 Portland Ave. S. | RICHFIELD, MN | 06.10.2025 | COMM# 47621-25062 THANK YOU!