10-15-1975..
JOINT -MEETIPIG -
RICHFIELD H~ZA AND PLANNING CONIMTSSION .
OCTOBER 15, 1975 ~ -
HRA COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Law (8:35 p.m.), Commissioners Ludeman,
• Jacobson, Anderson and Luettinger
_ PLANNING COfi~~ITSSIONERS Chairman Lien, Commissioners Ulrich, Ketc.~iam,
.PRESENT: Schlegel, Helmberger, Lindgren, Anderson, Ertman
and Susag. -
-STAFF PRESENT: Richard Krier, Planning Director; Peter Jarvis,.
BRW; Kathy Lovick, Secretary
Vice Chairman Jacobson called the HRA to order and Robert Lien called the Planning
Commission to order at 8:10 p.m. Richard Krier, Planning Director, announced that
' the city council hearing for.. the_red.evelopment plan..has been set_for November 10,
1975. - -- -- - ..
~M/Helmbexger, S/F. Anderson, that the planning commission receive-the emrironmental
assessment for the LHN program and redevelopment plan submitted to the commission
by the HRA. Motion carried.
M/A. P. Anderson, S/Ludeman, that the HRA receive the environmental assessment and
redevelopment plan consisting of Phase Y (a) inventozy_, (b) economic potentials
- ana]ysis (c) problem assessment determination; Phase II (a) alternative plans and
evaluations; Phase .Ill (a) development plan, (b) urban design elements, (c) project
costs and financing. Motion carried. ~ -.
Peter Jarvis, BRt1i, gave a brief history of the three phases of the redevelopmen~ plan.
He listed the three major issues as land. use, transportation, and environmental and
discussed the redevelopment plan. Mr. Jarvis discussed the project area boundaries
and asked members to consider the RING suggestion of extending the southeast
boundary of the project area to include the area of land to Grand.Avenue between
b6th Street and 67th Street. Chairman Law arrived at 8:35 p.m.
Norm Gilbertson, 6717 Lyndale Avenue South, asked that .his residential property
be reconsidered as apart of the plan.
Mr..Jarvis continued with the redevelopment plan presentation by discussing the
land use improvements, transportation and parking improvements and relating the
. improvements to the adopted goals and objectives. He mentioned typical urban
- design elements for buffers,. lighting, pedestrian walks, and building structure.
• Lastly, he gave a cost sw~unary. -
Mr. Steven Bard, 1025 Plymouth Building, stated that the arrangement of the HRA
- and planning commission with Mr. Burt Rottman of Lyndale Garden Center and- -
Mr. John Seiff, S. ~ M. Company to relocate on the corner of 66th Street and
Lyndale was-not necessarily a-satisfactory arrangement with the owners of that
property. Mr. Bard indicated his willingness to negotiate... Chairman Law expressed
the opinion that .the pxoblem could be resolved. -
M/Ulrieh, S/Anderson,. to recommend the proposed redevelopment plan to the HRA.
M/Susag, S/Ketcham to table the previous motion. Motion carried 6 yes - 3 no,
Ulrich, Anderson, Schlegel. - -
~.
The chairman from the RING Committee was. not present, so Mr. Krier gave a brief
sunmaary on the RING committee's activities. The next RING meeting is scheduled
for. November 21 ,1975, at which point-.they will finalize recommendations:
-Mr. Donald Swenson, T. G. Evensen and Associates, gave a presentation on the -
financing of the project. Mr. Krier further commented on the subject, and also the
relocation plan. - -
Mr. Carl McBride, Chairman, Commercial Improvement Committee stated that the
- Commercial Improvement Committee endorsed the redevelopment plan at the October 14,
1975 meeting. Mr. Ralph Bruins, member of the Commercial Improvement Committee,
also remarked about interested businessmen in-the project and over-all approval
of the Commercial Improvement Committee: - ~ .
• Mr. Krier, said that deterioration exists in the project area and that blighting
-influences were present. The deterioration is caused by obsolence and faulty .
arrangement of buildings and land uses. Building design and street design
~!
_ __
-3-
are also contributing to a deteriorating condition. Mr. Kxier referred the
commissioners to the problem assessment portion of the redevelopment plan and
the 'inventory portion of the redevelopment plan. Mr. Krier quoted sections of
the problem assessment which indicated the following:
. 1. Fragment arrangement of land uses mostly concentrated along Lyndale
Avenue are contributing to deterioration because of separation of
parking lots which cause the consumer to have to enter. the arterial
street traffic flow to get. to another place of business, because of
land uses which are tmcomplimentary and land uses which are completely
-isolated. The lack of a clear automobile pedestrian circulation and
.the inadequate pedestrian access have and are creating hazardous public
welfare conditions in the area.
~2. hand use conflicts have and are contributing to deteriorating condition.
These conflicts are most prevalent between residential uses anal commmercial
- uses. The Lyndale, Graham Avenue, Lyndale North of 66th area, the 1st
Avenue north of 66th~Street area and the 65th Street area exhibit the
'most critical conflict areas.
3. Underutilized land is contributing to deterioration. This is caused by
.over emphasis on separate parking rather than shared parking, lack of
relationship to nearby amenities,'low intensity of existing development.
The proposed redevelopment plan as described in the land use, transportation and
.environmental goals and objectives and plan eliminated the spread of detexioriatidn
by:
~1. Buffer commercial land uses-from residential areas.
2. Setting limits on expansion of commercial arias along Nicollet Avenue,
Lyndale Avenue and both Street.
3.~ Create comparible land use nodes which will better utilize existing
land.
e
d~..
-4,-
4. Create a better, more congestion free transportation system.
5. Add.. compatible-urban design elements to the area,
Mr. Krier indicated that the total private investment in the area was expected
to be approximately $21.6 million when the plan was completed. TYie HRA function
would be to assemble three (3) sites to assist $11,9 million of private investment
to occur. Because of the existing cost of land and the large-.number of property
owners it would be`difficult for private investment to assemble the land. Mr. Krier
discussed the property acquisition plan and property marketing strategies of the plan.
The city's adopted comprehensive plan was exhibited. Mr. Krier reviewed the
.comprehensive plan and its relationship to the redevelopment plan. He concluded
that the redevelopment--plan was consistent with the comprehensive plan.
--
M/Susag,~S/Anderson, to remove the-motion from table. Motion carried, -- ~ --
M/Ulrich, S/Anderson, to recommend the Recommended Redevelopment Plan to the HRA
(Resolution No. 16). Motion carried.
M/Ertman, S/Ketcham, to adjourn the planning commission. Motion carried..
M/A, P. Anderson, S/Jacobsen, to receive the resolution from the planning commission.
Motion carried.
HRA discussion of the. redevelopment plan and proposed. financing provisions
ensued.. Councilman Luettinger expressed his concerns that the full implication
of the proposed financing may not be understood, and-that he did not intend by
approving the plan, to indicate complete concurrence with the proposed financial
plan as presented thus far.
M/Ludeman, S/Jacobsen, to approve the redevelopment plan (Resolution No. 9) and
recommend it to_-the city council. Motion carried.
M/Ludeman, S/Jacobsen, to adjourn the HRA. Motion carr
Date Approved: December 8, 197.5
r n L, Law C a an
A. P. Anderson Secretary