08-08-1995CITY OF RICHFIELD
ftnnnim commission
nanDR
STUDY SESSION -- August 8, 1995
7:00 p.m.
Call to Order
Study Session Items
ITEM #1 Lyndale Avenue Strategic Development Plan
Overall Schedule
Public Information Meetings
Individual Meetings with Businesspersons and Residents
ITEM # 2 Comprehensive Plan Update
Revisions: Goals and Objectives, Symbols and Definitions
Guide Plan for 1 -494 Corridor
Adjournment
Agenda - August 8, 1995
Planning Commission Meeting
Lyndale Avenue Strategic Development Plan
1. Discussion of Overall Schedule
2. Discussion of Public Information Meetings
Dates/Location (September 6 & 7, 1995)
Purpose
Invitees
Notice
Format /Agenda
Questions to be asked
Refreshments
Check -in
Name tags
3. Discussion of Individual Meetings with Businesspersons and Residents
Dates /Schedule (September 13 -15)
Purpose
Interviewers
Method/Assignments
Residents - evening - 6:30 -9:30 p.m.
Businesspersons - daytime
Questions to be asked
Notice
Handout
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
MARICHMAGNDAM DOC
LYNDALE AVENUE STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SCHEDULE 8 -2 -95
1.0 IDENTIFY WHAT EXISTS
AUG 1 -31 Neighborhood analysis, mapping, newsletter design, review
background, photography
AUG 1 - SEP 30 Market analysis
AUG 8 Meet with Planning Commission
2.0 INVOLVE STAKEHOLDERS
SEP 6 & 7 Conduct public information meetings, prepare /mail notice to
residents and businesses regarding individual meetings
SEP 12 Meet with Planning Commission
SEP 13 -15 Conduct individual meetings
SEP 15 -22 Develop Guiding Principles
SEP 26 Planning Commission/City Council/HRA Workshop #1
SEP 25 -29 Prepare /mail Newsletter #1
3.0 EXPLORE THE POSSIBILITIES
SEP 25 - OCT 20 Develop concept plan alternatives /strategies /meet with Publicorp
OCT 24 Meet with Planning Commission (regarding concepts)
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
OCT 25 Mail notice of Corridor Meeting #1
NOV 8 or 9 Conduct Corridor Meeting #1
NOV 14 Workshop #2
NOV 1 -17 Prepare /mail Newsletter #2
4.0 DEMONSTRATE HOW AREA SHOULD LOOK
NOV 14 - DEC 10 Develop preferred plan and strategies, design guidelines,
illustrations
DEC 1 -15 Prepare /mail Newsletter #3
5.0 DEVELOP A STRATEGY TO GET IT DONE
DEC 15 - JAN 5, 1996 Develop strategy /meeting with Staff and Publicorp
JAN 5 Mail notice of Corridor Meeting #2
JAN 17 or 18
JAN 23
6.0 SEEK AGREEMENT
JAN 19 - MAR 15
SCHEDULE TO BE DETERMINED
SCHEDULE TO BE DETERMINED
Conduct Corridor Meeting #2
Meet with Planning Comrnission
Prepare Draft Report
Mail notice of Public Hearing
Conduct Joint Public Hearing
SCHEDULE TO BE DETERMINED Prepare Final Report
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
Public Information Meeting
Agenda
7:00 P.M. Registration
7 :10 Introductions/Welcome /Purpose - Dan Linnihan
7:20 Resource Presentation - Fred Hoisington
Project Scope
Process
Review Background /Analysis
7:40 Open Forum
Opportunities
Challenges
Issues
8:10 Small Group Discussion
Evaluation Factors
Guiding Principles
8:45 Open Forum - Reporting
9:15 Summary
9:30 Adjourn
Procedural Guidelines
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
M:\RICHFD\HGNDA.FRM
Date
Business Name
Address
Contact Person
Phone No.
Questions of Businesses
Introduction:
The Richfield Planning Commission is developing a plan for the Lyndale Avenue business area from W.74th
to W.77th Street. It will consider a variety of alternative concepts ranging from simple fix-up to significant
redevelopment. The Planning Commission would like your input before developing its plans.
Questions:
1. How long have you been in business at this location?
2. Where does most of your business come from?
3. Why did you choose this location (low rent, high traffic, customer base, etc.)?
4. Are there any problems with doing business here (parking, traffic, etc.)?
5. What do you believe the City should do to improve the area's business potential or is it
functioning very well as is?
6. What plans do you have for expansion or relocation?
Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc.
Date
Resident Name
Street Address
City, State Zip
Phone No.
Questions of Residents
Introduction:
The Richfield Planning Commission is developing a plan for the Lyndale Avenue business area from W.74th
to W.77th Street. It will consider a variety of alternative concepts ranging from simple fix-up to significant
redevelopment. Since land for redevelopment is limited, some alternatives could involve the purchase of
residential property. The Planning Commission would like your input before developing its plans.
Questions:
1. How long have you lived here? Are you the owner or a renter?
2. Do you plan to stay at this address or are you contemplating a change? If so, when?
3. Are the neighborhood and Lyndale business areas generally compatible or is there an element
of conflict? If so, what kind of conflicts do you experience?
4. What kind of redevelopment do you feel would be compatible with the neighborhood?
5. While the City generally dislikes the taking of residential property, this will be a very difficult
area to redevelop without some residential acquisition. If you are satisfied with the purchase
price, would you be willing to sell to accommodate business expansion?
Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc.
M:\RICHFD\RE SDI SC. FPM
8 -1 -95
Schedule - Lyndale Avenue Strategic Development Plan
Study Area: Aldrich to Garfield Avenues
74th to 77th Streets
Oblectives:
To evaluate potential ways to upgrade the Lyndale Avenue
business area.
To develop a plan of action employing significant stakeholder
residents and businesspeople) input.
Meeting Schedule:
Aug. 8 Planning Commission at City Hall
Sept. 6 & 7 Public Information Meetings
Sept. 12 Planning Commission at City Hall
Sept. 13 -15 Individual Meetings at all Businesses and Residences
Garfield to Aldrich)
Sept. 26 Planning Comniission/City Council/HRA Workshop #1 at City Hall
Oct. 24 Planning Commission at City Hall
Nov. 8 or 9 Corridor Meeting #1
Nov. 14 Planning Commission/City Council/HRA Workshop #2 at City Hall
Jan. 17 or 18
Jan. 23
Date Undetermined
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
M ARICHMSCHEDSTR.DOC
Corridor Meeting #2
Planning Commission at City Hall
Public Hearing at City Hall
M E M O `95 comprehensive plan update 7/31/95
from the brauer group, inc.
RE: COMMUNITY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES REVIEW
Here are some suggestions to help all those of us who were not involved in the original
determination of the GOALS and OBJECTIVES to be better able to utilize them as criteria
for PLAN review. Words or phrases that have been removed or revised are shown (in
parens), and new, relocated, or restated words or phrases are bold italic.
At the same time each OBJECTIVE that seems to be a design criteria rather than a
lapnningcriteria, has been identified. Design criteria would be used to.evaluate development
plans, or used as a basis for the application of special use requirements, and will befound in
Volume Four of the PLAN..
2.6 COMMUNITY GOALS....... were developed by the Steering Committee based
on the values and issues developed earlier. The Committee first listed broad
concepts and then grouped them in five categories for presentation. In this
summary, goals are numbered (G1, etc.), and supporting objectives are listed
under each goal (0),
community wide G1 Preserve those elements that contribute to and enhance the small
town character and community identity
redevelop housing supply to meet diverse needs while
maintaining the integrity of existing neighborhoods.
encourage community participation in order to reinforce a
sense of community ownership and belonging
0 continue rnurncipai investrrten[ tnat enrrances cor-nmu1111y
identity.
O preserve historical, natural, and cultural resources
G2 Maintain and enhance Richfield's image as a distinct and
t livable.commurtity.
0 maintain'"ar d,providp qua-lity -amenities and a safe living
environment -for all. residents.
4 " advocate and support -With -m0n'icipal,irivestment a high
quality visual environment throughout the City (and)
particular /y a long (within) -major transportation corridors.
O encourage and support a diversity of compatible non-
residential land uses that are accessible and responsive to
the needs of Richfield and adjacent communities.
G3 Provide.an economic climate within Richfield that will (ensure) _
encourage the availability of quality -..gaods, services, and
employment opportunities for residents.
O encourage business growth
GOALs2 PAGE 1
M E M 0 `95 comprehensive plan update 7131/95
from the brauer group, inc.
G12 Preserve high water quality conditions in surface waters by
encouraging reduced use of pesticides and chemical turf
treatments that contribute to water pollution.
infrastructure G13 To create-an infrastructure that responds to the needs of the
next decade.
0 promote infrastructure improvements that are responsive to
and appropriate for existing and future needs.
design O promote an infrastructure that is efficient and high quality.
G14 Assure the long term maintenance and eventual replacement of
infrastructure.
O provide adequate annual funding
O select, train, and retain capable maintenance staff
design G15 Promote an infrastructure that ensures environmental
soundness.
design G16 Reduce visual and physical clutter by burying all new and
replacement infrastructure utilities.
C-OA c2 PAG E 4
memo date: 8/1/95
from the brauer group, inc . .......................... richfield `95 comprehensive plan update
TO: CITY STAFF AND PLANNING TASK GROUP
RE: SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS FOR THE `95 PLAN UPDATE
NOTE CHANGES MADE TO REFLECT MEETING OF 7/26/95 IN BOLD FACE
1. LAND USE AND OCCUPANCY ................from the current ('82) Plan should be used
again so that we can compare conditions. City staff have completed a study within the
past few years with slightly different classifications, but useful comparisons are
possible.
LAND USE DESIGNATION 1982 PLAN 1994 STUDY
RESIDENTIAL 49.3%
Single Family %
Duplex %
Apartment %
COMMERCIAL 4.1%
Mixed Land Use
OFFICE
INDUSTRIAL 0.6%
TRANSPORTATION 0.2%
STREETS 30:0%
PUBLIC 14.9%
Quasi Public
School
Park
VACANT 0.7%
Water
2. PLAN land use descriptions and graphic designations should be established at the
outset. They should also be similar to the `82 designations for comparison and
analysis. PLAN designations do not confer "rights" like zoning designations do, but
they have been held to be a considered judgement of what the city considers to be
the most, appropriate future use. That makes it very difficult for the city to deny an
application that otherwise meets all of the general criteria for zoning.
WEMOUSES page 1
memo date: 8/1/95
from the brauer group, inc . .......................... richfield '95 comprehensive plan update
We believe that the PLAN graphic is more easily read and understood if the land
use designations are shown by outlining each area and inserting a letter code inside
the outline. (See Eden Prairie Plan attached as example) rather than using various
shades or graphic patterns as was done in the '82 Richfield plan. With that concept
as a choice, the following letter designations are recommended:
USE DESCRIPTION DENSITY 95 PLAN 82 PLAN
Residential
Single Family up to 4u /ac Undesignated Undesignated
Single Family Attached up to 8u /ac R -SFH SF
Multiple up to 20u /ac R -MM MR -1 & 2
Multiple over 20u /qc R -MH MR -3
Commercial
Regional over 150,000sf C -R C -1, 2, MR -2
Community up to 150,000sf C -C C -2, MR -2 & 3
Neighborhood up to 50,000sf C -N Not Designated
Office
Office up to 0.75FAR O
Ofc- Warehouse 0.3rAR O -W
Industrial
Parks & Open Space
Public
up to 0.2 FAR
NA
M
Ic
Not Designated
Not Designated
Not Designated
PK Graphic Only
Name of Park and Special Facility)
PUB -_ Not Designated
PW= public works, W= water, S= sewer, etc.)
Quasi Public use most applicable QP -_ Institutional
CH= church, CL =club, MU= museum, etc)
Public Schools S Institutional
Name of School or Facility)
NEMOUSES page 2
D R A F T `95 comprehensive plan update 8/2/95
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (3.5 continued)
d. INTERSTATE - LYNDALE- NICOLLET (ILN)
The ILN area has been the subject of planning studies since 1985, and actual
redevelopment work has been completed on "Phase I" (that part between Emerson
and Colfax Avenues), and is underway for "Phase 2" (that area between Colfax and
Lyndale Avenues). An earlier project produced the Hampton Inn at the corner of
Lyndale and West 77th Street, anew site and edifice for the Congregational Church.
The most dramatic change for the area, however, was the upgrading of West 77th
Street to a four -lane, divided roadway with a 20 -foot tall barrier wall along the
residential properties to the north. This major roadway connection between three
freeway interchanges improved both access and visibility for what is now one of the
most desirable commercial locations on the entire 1494 metro corridor.
The PLAN proposal shows all of the developed regional commercial areas as CR,
Commercial - Regional, and expands that use designation to all the rest of the area
except two sites ...... the "Cloverleaf" site, and the New Orleans apartment site. Tax
base and traffic distribution considerations require some non - commercial uses in this
subarea, and, while not the only possibilities, they are the two most logical locations
today.
The freeway intersection site offers the most visibility ( "banner value ") of any site in
the entire metro area. Development on this site should be more than simply well
done, it should be striking, and should be identified as the "front door" of the City.
Typical "Big Box" regional commercial development will not be striking, and will add
very little to the tax base when compared to high value, high -rise office buildings.
The New Orleans site redevelopment offers the other opportunity in this subarea.
The PLAN eliminates the City Garage site, and replaces that inconsistent and
inefficient use of valuable land with mid - density multiple residential (RM) north of
West 77th Street, and regional commercial C(R) to the south. The City facilities
should be relocated to the former New Ford Town or other airport lands, or other
less valuable redevelopment locations within the City.
When the "trailer park" is redeveloped, the east half would be a good addition to
Lincoln Field, and the balance can be developed as RM to expand and upgrade what
is already in place. The mixed commercial and residential development area along
Lyndale Avenue is presently under study by a consultant, and should be designated
as "Plan Study" in the PLAN. "Plan Study" is not a proposed land use, but rather
a procedure that preserves whatever rights or uses that exist at the time the PLAN is
THE BRAUER GROUP, INC ..................... drafone2 ........................................ PAGE ONE -16
D R A F T `95 comprehensive plan update 8/2/95
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (3.5 continued)
adopted and avoids the possible implications of other designations being attached
before the actual development plan is adopted.
e. CEDAR AVENUE CORRIDOR
f. PORTLAND AVENUE CORRIDOR
g. PENN AVENUE CORRIDOR
h. NICOLLET AVENUE CORRIDOR
L 1-494 CORRIDOR (EAST)
The ILN subarea divides the 1 -494 corridor into two parts, EAST, and WEST. The
EAST part covers the areas between 3rd Avenue South and Cedar Avenue, while
the WEST part covers the area between the Edina border and I -35W.
Both city parks in the EAST part should be enlarged as opportunity presents itself.
The small triangle of land that will be a remnant when West 77th Street is extended
across MN TH77 should be added to Washington Park, and the vacant tract
between the Bloom -Rich apartments and the single family homes to the north,
should also be part of the park. The single row of houses between Roosevelt Park
and West 76th Street should become part of the park as opportunity presents itself.
The area between Assumption Church and Portland Avenue should be regional
commercial and /or office based upon the highest return and first opportunity. The
Crest Wood apartments and the plumbing contractor yard are the only inconsistent
uses today, and both are in need of redevelopment.
Corinthian Place and the four most westerly buildings in the Hampton Place
apartment complex should be converted to regional commercial use in order to
provide a large enough site to support a feasible development that could provide
goods and services to an expanded residential population in high density units on
adjacent sites. The remainder of the Hampton Place and part of Heritage Square site
should be upgraded to high density to compliment the Richfield Towers project. A
neighborhood convenience center could be incorporated into the high rise project,
and could be connected with an enclosed structure to the Richfield Towers by
vacating Chicago Avenue.
A neighborhood convenience commercial facility on the vacant land at 12th Avenue
would be bracketed by two existing medium density multiple residential sites. The
balance of the remaining space should follow the predominant uses today.... office
and regional commercial.
THE BRAUER GROUP, INC ..................... drafone2 ........................................ PAGE ONE -17
D R A F T `95 comprehensive plan update 8/2/95
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (3.5 continued)
1 1-494 CORRIDOR (WEST)
Except for the fact that the primary °banner site" is already occupied by Naegele, the
area between 1 -35W and Penn Avenue offers nearly the same commercial
development potential as its counterpart to the east of 1 -35W. What it lacks is an
upgraded street between the two freeway interchanges. The PLAN proposal here
suggests a way to approach that situation by improving Knox and West 77th, and
developing commercial sites on both sides of that upgraded street. The
Fountainhead site offers more value than a mid density residential development can
support or justify, and would be ripe for complete or partial redevelopment. A Mixed
Use project would be most likely and so that is what is indicated. Closing some
residential streets, Intersection improvements and, perhaps, elimination of the
service road to the north would be important to this concept, but represent more
detail than should be incorporated into the PLAN. A specific redevelopment plan that
would answer these kinds of questions should be prepared for this area in the near
future.
West 76th Street carries very high traffic volumes today, and the increased density
and character of the development in the proposed PLAN will add even more traffic,
particularly between Penn sand I -35W. For that reason the PLAN proposals would
close most of the cross - street intersections in order to improve the safety and
movement of through traffic. Land use changes would not be required, but
conversion of individual lots to attached single family dwellings would be the most
likely request when the existing structures have reached the end of their useful lives.
The Upton intersection would be the only access for neighborhoods to the north and
south, and the spacing would make a signal possible at that point. The five lots
fronting on 77th could be converted to a higher density single family development
that would have a common point of access for right in /right out only.
The "remnant" single family areas, less than sixty units, would most likely convert to
higher density housing eventually, but that decision should follow preparation and
review of a specific development plan and solicitation of development proposals.
THE BRAUER GROUP, INC ..................... drafone2 ........................................ PAGE ONE -18
Ittl l N ® \I I W I
H 1 N wi n®uwl
Nli
NN111 I Iwlli ut H u °u
1111 ®
1111111 1111 nll WI
1111111 IIH1111 111 I
1111111 11111111 1
MINI 1 INIINI 1111
1111111 111 11 IHI 111111
1111111 IHNIII IIIIHII 1W
1111111 11111111 11111111111111
1111Ii1 11111111 11111111 111111
111111111111111 1111HI1 MINI
11111'/ \1111111 111111
IIII MINI
IIH1111 111111
11111101 Mill
IW1N1 111HI
1111111
ecaxe. r.
11,/111 n
0
J •al 1
151 ME — J
1TM!e'i ii..
Mir.
t",
N`
r _ AI. c• :ice !c :
t
1_ Mr.`MIOS
MOM
e—
MID
Q111111
SI 1111 111111
16111111 111111
milli 11111
1111 ry q
aEllllll ii
I
tlNI03 d0 A110
C-3
Pte'
3A tlOA
LLJ
CTo
L 3
1
J
u
1 H sc
W
i
I
I1
I
i
0
u
o
a
a s,
1I
11 eee
1
L,
A 3% .
l
t1 ,
1
1