01-06-1975 Special
n
.(
- JOINT H12P/PLANNING COMti4ISSl'ON
SPECIAL MEETING
January 6, 1975
CALL TO ORDER
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
HRA: Chairman. Law, Commissioner Anderson, Luettinger and
Ludeman.
r
PLANNING COMMISSION: Chairman Wozniczka, Commissioners
Vinella, Teske, Helmberger, Anderson, U1ricYf, Lien and
Peterson.
CON~IERCIAL IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE: Ralph Bruins, Jack Langer,
Don Johnston, Ed Nedelcoff, Marls Ahlquist, Robert Heeter, ,.
Mr. ~ N~cs. Richard Hanson and Connie Hoverson. ~ .
STAFF PRESENT: Richard C. Krier, Planning Director,-Mark.
Hendrickson, Planning Aide, Janice Berg, Secretary.
Peter Jarvis, BRW and Ronald Bussy, Urban Projects.
HRA: Commissioner Jacobsen, out of-town- business.
LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET COMMERCIAL IMPROVEMEN'~~PROGRAM
Chairman Law gave a brief background regarding the Commercial Improvement..Program.
Chairman Law stated that at the request of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Commercial Improvement
' ~ Committee a presentation would be made by the consulting firm, BRW regarding part of
Phase I of this Improvement Program. At.this meeting no action will be taken .regarding
Phase I of the Commercial Improvement Program. The purpose of this meeting will be
information on part of-Phase I of the Program. -
Chairman Law introduced Ralph Bruins, of the Commercial`Improvement.Committee-. Mr. Bruins
gave the background on the formation of the L-H-N Commercial Impravement Committee and
its objectives. Mr. Bruins stressed the need to solve the pxotsl:ems of the commercial area
before they become worse. He stressed the need for continued support of the Commercial
Improvement Committee.. - .- .
Chairman Law introduced Richard Krier, Planning Director. M'r. Krier reviewed the process
used in the Phase I Program and-.the process for Phase II and II of this program. Mr. '
Kriex noted that the problems perceived through-both the residents (Residents. Census)
and the merchants and landlords (Business Census) were generally very similar..
''~ ~ Mr. Krier introduced Mr: Peter Jarvis of BRW. Mr. Jarvis gave a summary of the Businessmen's
Census. Mr. Jarvis noted through. talks with the businessmen and landowners it appears
-2-
that in the last four years the turnover rate was approximately 55 to 60 businesses
~' in the study area (including office and-retail goods and services) or 25o to 300 of
-7'
the total businesses. Mr. Jarvis also stated that- 50% of the businessmen believed the
area is getting continiously weaker,-which indicates a rather low confidence level in th
' business community Mr. Jarvis also noted that`from the inventory approximately 37% ~ti
of the property is owner occuped and approximately 63% is leased. The. above figures
include multi-family units in the study-area. This absentee landlord ratio is not
unusual for commercial areas.
Some of the advantages perceived by the businessmen were the good accessability to the
area both regionally and subregionally and that the area has a well established trade - -
area. The perceived major problems of concern were categorized into three major areas.:
The first concern related to problems, such as, the lack of a major anchor to draw
ctxsseomers and services, and compefcicion wi i h modei~i~. cente~°s . The second major category
related to Physical problems. The Physical problems most often stated were outdated
design, scattered development and general appearance. The third category concerned
problems of traffic and parking.
Mr. Jarvis then introduced Mr. Ronald Hussy. Mr. Bussy,a Nfarketing Economist, gave a su+~ary-
of the way in which the Economic Development Potentials Analysis was formulated and .~
some of the conclusions from this Analysis. As the commercial area grows weaker, more
viable merchants will move out and the~less viable tenants will move in, resulting in a
steady regression in this area. An upgrading is necessary to present a location for a
major department stare to move into .this area, In addition upgrading the area will
encourage certain types of businesses which are not now adequately represented in-the L-H-N
area to move ~ip.
Mr. Hussy's comments on the commercial development potentials in the L-H-N area were given
under two major assumptions. Assumption A supposed that because of contrary development
objectives, the unavailability of tenants, or inadequate redevelopment activity in the
_ - ~ ..~
L-H-N area, improvement will take place without the benefit of a major anchor tenant.
- --- - - ,.
-3-
Assumption B on the other hand,. supposes that the attraction of a.major store tenant
will be part of the development program.
Mr. Bossy also .discussed the 1980 potential for commercial service space and office
space in the L-H-N area, He described the very large demand for multi-family housing.
in the L-H-N area. He stated there is a 1980 demand for 530 additional multi-family
housing units and an immediate need for 200 elderly housing units.
Mr. Bossy stated that there are certain parcels under utilized, which could be more.
intensely developed, possibly certain commercial parcels taken out of commercial and
put into multi-family and certain areas could be combined.
Mr. Hussy's recommendations for the area today aree
1. Focus attention on the HUB in an attempt to attract a major anchor. ~.
2. Lower density garden multi-family type development consistent with the character of
Richfield.
The following table represents the additional Economic Potentials of the area presented
by Mr. Hussy.
WARRANTED LAND USE DEVELOPMENTS
to y ea -
Sq. Ft. Additional.(Sq. Ft.) Percent Change
se es Existing 1980 ~~3~0 1 - 5-90
~mparison Retail
Assumption A
Assumption B (Major Anchor)
mvenience, Retail
ther Retail
~mmercial Services
Mice Uses '
il:tifamily Residential (Units)
180,000 42,000 59,000 79,000 40.5 33.0
180,000 210,000 284,000 335,000 18.3 18,0
113,200 18,000 30,800 43,800 63.8 42.2
106,000 -- -- -- __ _~
61,000 15,000 15.,000 15,000 0.0 0.0
104,000 33,000 50,000 67,000 51.5 34.0
--- 530 1,080 1,740 103.8 61.1
~ ~~ ~
Mr. Jack Langer, Korner Plaza, asked if a 100,000 square foot promotional department
store could serve as an anchor business in a shopping area.
Mr. Bossy stated a.promotional department store such as..Target, K-Mart or Woolworth
a
could accomplish this purpose. Prior to a few years ago such types of promotional
department stores were only in free standing situations, but have been going into
• ~ -4-
already established shopping centers or new centers as an anchor and have been finding
.• ;
- that their business has done very well.
Mr. Ralph Bruins, Summit State.Bank, asked if Mr. Bussy's recommendation was to concentr
on the HUB and is there sufficient area available to accommodate a 100,000 square foot
addition, Mr. Bussy stated that this is one of the "issues which should be addressed
. ••~~ in Phase II of the Program, However, Mr. Bussy was of the opinion that the HUB complex
could be rearranged to make some sense out of it and that sufficient area to consider
a department store operation in the HUB does exist.
Mr. Jarvis reviewed the five major inventories and problem .assessment.
The following areas were covered in the inventory.
1. Existing Land Use.
2. Existing Zoning.
3. Property Ownerhsip.
. ~ -~ 4 . Parking Inventory .
-~ 5o Transportation.
Following the inventories Mr. Jarvis covered the area of Problem Assessment. Mr. Jarvis
described the key problems, both, potential and existing within four major categories.
- Under land use he described graphically the serious problems of fragmented land use,
present land use conflicts and under-utilized land, In the transportation and parking
assessment, conflicts between traffic flow and parking were highlighted. In addition
turning movement conflicts at 66th Street and Lyndale and Nicollet, along with
awkward and inefficient traffic circulation patterns in the off-street areas were pointed
out. The lack of pedestrian facilities was brought out as a serious problem in the area,
~• The environmental assessment covered problems which occur from a lack of visual unity,
commercial definition and any pedestrian amenities. The final category discussed
was the graphic representation of the warranted 1980 development potentials as
~j outlined in the Development Potentials Analysis Report.
~ .
_~
Chairman Law closed the presentation portion of the aneeting with these. comments;
Chairman Law felt the presentation was very educational and this would be a challenge,
with alot of work involved, with respect to a long range plan, not just for the future
but also for right now, Chairman Law stated that this presentation focused, on many
problem areas, not just. to the LHIV businessmen but the surrounding residents and
the citizens of Richfield. He recommended the goals be~finalized by the Commercial
Improvement Committee,so that we can proceed to Phase II of the Program.
Mr. Krier recommended that this should move as rapidly as possible, to keep tempo
alive. Goals and objectives of the businessmen should be set by the first week
in February ending Phase I, so that implementation of Phase II and Phase III be completed
by April or May.
It was agreed that the HRA and Planning Commission hold another joint meeting for the
purpose of discussing the goals and objectives of the business comrraanity and nearby
residents.
AIJlTOIIRN[~'~1T : 10:30 p . m.
Respectfully submitted,
~n'l /1~-,.~
Joan Helmberger, Secretary
Richfield Planning Com-~~ission
o
.~