Loading...
09-26-1995CITY Of R10HRELD PLRnnim commission nGEnDFI September 26, 1995 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Approval of Minutes Regular Planning Commission meeting of August 29, 1995 and study session of September 12, 1995. Old Business ITEM #1 Comprehensive Plan Update Review of Penn & 66th Street Changes Review of Cedar Avenue Changes Review of 1-494 West Changes Special Meeting with City Council and HRA ITEM #1 Lyndale Avenue Strategic Development Plan Workshop Discussion of Public Input: Meetings and Interviews Discussion of Guiding Principles Liaison Reports School Board Community Services Advisory Commission HRA City Council AdHoc 135/1494 Traffic Committee Adjournment PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting August 22, 1995 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Daniel Linnihan; Commissioners: Timothy Erlander, David Gepner, Mitchell Hadley, Kevin Hansen, Dawn Postudensek, Kristal Stokes, and Paul Wasko MEMBERS ABSENT: Pamela Dmytrenko COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor STAFF PRESENT: Julie Urban, Zoning Administrator STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Kilian, Steve Lindgren, Bob Nelson The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Linnihan at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Stokes, S/Wasko to approve the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 1995. Motion carried: 8 -0 M/Erlander, S /Stokes to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission study session of August 8, 1995. Motion carried: 8 -0 OLD BUSINESS Page 1 of 4 August 22, 1995 ITEM #1 Comprehensive Plan Don Brauer, of The Brauer Group Inc., reviewed the revised guide plans for the I -494 Corridor. Commissioner Gepner asked if Mr. Brauer could first give an explanation of how the guide plan affects property values. Mr. Brauer said it didn't affect value until a specific development plan is done for an area. The guide plan designations can, however, serve as one important factor in protecting against or supporting a proposed change. The Commissioners decided that it would be helpful to include this information about the purpose and role of the guide plan in the text of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Brauer reviewed the changes he made, based on the comments from last week, to the ILN area. Zoning Administrator Urban pointed out that the Cloverleaf site should be designated as Office. In the east I -494 area, Mr. Brauer explained the changes that had been made to Wilson Park but stated that Don Fondrick, Community Services Director, had expressed some concern about the cul du sacs that were shown. Zoning Administrator Urban stated that she had handed out a letter from Director Fondrick that explains the practical reasons for putting in loop streets rather than cul du sacs. The group decided that Steering Committee Member Bob Nelson should ask the School District for input on the Wilson Park idea stressing that the plan is just a draft and that the group is looking for other perspectives. Commissioner Postudensek questioned why Wilson Park was proposed for expansion. The group explained that Wilson is centrally located, Washington Park is not an ideal location for a park, and expanding Wilson would complement Centennial School. Commissioner Wasko questioned what the triggering mechanism would be for an expansion of Wilson. Mr. Brauer stated that if the Washington Park site were ever developed, the Comprehensive Plan would require park land replacement which would then trigger an expansion at Wilson. The group discussed the effect of designating the houses that are in the vicinity of Wilson Park as future park land and how the removal of houses would be perceived. The group also questioned the consequences of closing Bloomington Avenue. Mayor Kirsch reminded the group that is their role to be visionary. If they decide they don't want to upset anyone with the plan, nothing will change. Commissioner Postudensek suggested that the group get more information about the effect of the proposed Wilson Park expansion on traffic patterns. Commissioner Erlander expressed concern about losing the single family homes by Wilson Park. Chairperson Linnihan asked Mr. Brauer if he could give the group some kind of criteria or formula that they could use to be more consistent in their decision - making. He stressed that their decisions need to be based on facts. Mr. Brauer agreed to include the values that he uses for each corridor. Mr. Brauer suggested changing the plan to replace four of the cul du sacs with loop streets. The group agreed that the rest of the east corridor plan was okay and that they would wait to make a decision on Wilson Park until they had more information. Commissioner Stokes Page 2 of 4 August 22, 1995 suggested that the group have the Community Services Commission provide some feedback on the Wilson Park idea. Zoning Administrator Urban agreed to follow up with the Community Services Department. Mr. Brauer explained the changes he had made to the western part of the corridor and said that he could remove some of the cul du sacs in this area. The group discussed the plan that was adopted for widening 76th Street by three feet. The request was made to see copies of this plan, alternative one, before deciding on the guide plan proposal to add cul du sacs or loop streets. Commissioner Postudensek expressed her concern with losing single family homes south of 76th Street and east of Penn Avenue. Chairperson Linnihan recommended that the group be aware of the actual number of homes that are affected by their proposals. The group discussed the potential for increased traffic along 76th Street due to the new development occurring east of 35W. Several Commission and Steering Committee Members raised concerns about bringing this Plan to the neighborhood so soon after the Council had made a decision to only widen the street by 3 feet. This issue could jeopardize the entire Plan if it's raised again at this time. Commissioner Erlander stated that he was not in favor of the plans for 76th Street west of Penn Avenue and wasn't fully supportive of the plan for east of Penn Avenue either. Commissioner Erlander made a motion to that effect which was seconded by Commissioner Hadley. The group voted against the motion, 6 -5. Several members explained that if the concept east of Penn Avenue and south of 76th Street was accepted by the group, they would agree to vote against the plan for the west side of Penn. Chairperson Linnihan suggested that the Plan show the alternative that had been accepted by the City Council in June and the group agreed. To move the process along in the future, the group decided they could table some of these kinds of issues and agree to revisit them later. Mr. Brauer continued by showing a draft plan of the Cedar Avenue corridor. The draft proposed moving Cedar Avenue to 18th Avenue until Diagonal Boulevard when it would return to its current location. This proposal would provide more space for CDP -type developments along Trunk Highway (TH) 77 and accommodate future plans for expanding TH 77. Mr. Brauer explained that the draft takes into consideration all of the airport expansion alternatives. Committee Member Kilian pointed out that the Visions group had had a similar idea, but that they expanded the frontage road instead to prevent the backs of buildings from showing to TH 77, Committee Member Kilian pointed out that the Steering Committee had determined that the Cedar corridor will not attract high quality residential housing because of the proximity to the airport. For that reason, they had envisioned office and commercial uses all the way to I -494 instead of medium density residential housing (RM). He also suggested that they add another half block, on the west side of 18th Avenue, to the commercial/office area. Mr. Brauer pointed out that much of that is good quality housing that would be expensive to remove. He didn't think the City would be able to attract such a large amount of the type of development the group was thinking about. Mr. Brauer stated that he could label the area now labeled RM, both RM and O. Committee Member Lindgren pointed out that the group should consider the soundproofing that has occurred in this area. It may not be a good idea to develop a plan that involves eliminating houses that have just been soundproofed with federal funds. Mr. Brauer Page 3 of 4 August 22, 1995 responded that the triggering mechanism for this area would be the actions of the airport. Mr. Brauer agreed to plot the area that is being soundproofed. Staff will provide the appropriate maps. Committee Member Lindgren also mentioned that there may be a restriction against planning for the New Ford Town area until the buyout is complete. Further investigation into that issue is needed. Mr. Brauer agreed to make some revisions to the plans based on the comments made tonight. ITEM #2 ILN Update Chairperson Linnihan reminded the Commissioners of the public meetings on September 6 and 7 and the individual interviews on September 13 and 14. Zoning Administrator Urban agreed to assign interview areas to the Commissioners and to hand out the interview forms and instructions at the Planning Commission meeting on September 12. LIAISON REPORTS No liaison reports were given. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 10:10 p.m. othy Erlander Planning Commission Secretary Page 4 of 4 August 22, 1995 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Study Session September 12, 1995 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Daniel Linnihan; Commissioners: Pamela Dmytrenko, David Gepner, Mitchell Hadley, Kevin Hansen, Dawn Postudensek, Kristal Stokes, and Paul Wasko MEMBERS ABSENT: Timothy Erlander COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor STAFF PRESENT: Byron Wallace, Community Development Director Julie Urban, Zoning Administrator STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Kilian The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Linnihan at 7:05 p.m. ITEM #1 Lyndale Avenue Development Plan Update Chairperson Linnihan asked the Commissioners to give their impressions of the public meetings that were held the previous week. Commissioner Hadley felt the businesses were suspicious about government in general. The residents were concerned about maintaining the residential neighborhood feeling. Commissioner Wasko reported that the businesses were concerned about what happened with the CSM development. The residents had some immediate issues that could be resolved without the plan. Commissioner Dmytrenko observed mixed opinions that included suspicion as well as excitement. The residents seemed to like the existing businesses and are concerned about losing their homes. Commissioner Hansen felt the business meeting provided a good opportunity for the businesspersons to vent their feelings. The residents seemed more open - minded, and in his group, they suggested leveling the whole 7600 block. Commissioner Gepner reported that their were a couple of vocal people in his group that didn't want change to occur. Chairperson Linnihan found his group of businesspersons to be cynical about the City's motives. He also observed that some business persons returned the next night and saw that as a positive sign. The residents seemed to appreciate being included in the Page 2 September 12, 1995 process. Although they had many negative things to say about the area, the residents wanted the City to consider the existing businesses in any plan. Commissioner Dmytrenko pointed out that many people seemed to misunderstand the role of the Planning Commission. Fred Hoisington, of Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc., handed out two brief summaries of the information he collected from the meetings. Mr. Hoisington went over the summaries and added comments from the interviews he had done that morning. Mr. Hoisington noted that he found several businesses that hadn't been there for a long time and also that some of the building space seemed underutilized. Commissioner Hansen asked if it would be feasible for the businesses to cooperate and do something on their own. Mr. Hoisington explained that it's easier when a developer comes in and does it because he or she has more financial strength and also because it's difficult to get complete agreement from the businesses. He stated that once we have a better idea where we want to go with the area, questions like this can be explored. Councilmember Susag pointed out the exciting opportunity this project presents for the Planning Commission. He emphasized the importance of communication and that the Commissioners need to act as agents in the communication process. Commissioner Postudensek asked how far the Planning Commission would go in pushing a particular plan, and stated that she felt the Commission should play a neutral role. Chairperson Linnihan responded that the Commission will ultimately make a recommendation to enact a particular plan, and the Commissioners will need to stand behind the decisions that are made. Mr. Hoisington added that the Commission needs to be objective but is not a neutral party. They will need to take a position when the time comes. ITEM #2 Comprehensive Plan Update Don Brauer, planning consultant, explained that the group would look at Penn Avenue this evening and would wait with parks and open space until the second Tuesday October when they could coordinate with the Community Services Commission. Zoning Administrator Urban mentioned that some form of joint meeting would take place at 6:00 if the group was agreeable. The group reviewed the revisions made to the I -494 corridor. Zoning Administrator Urban handed out Alternative One, the plan for 76th Street that was adopted by the Council in June. Commissioner Postudensek asked Mr. Brauer to include the number of housing units lost and/or replaced with the next plans. Commissioner Postudensek questioned why the plan includes any cul -du -sacs. Mr. Brauer explained that one of the goals the Steering Committee established was to reduce access to arterials. He explained that the group will eventually look at transportation as a whole and will Page 3 September 12, 1995 need to check and coordinate with Department of Transportation plans. Commissioner Dmytrenko pointed out the need to maintain access to Woodlake Church and Donaldson Park. The group discussed the revisions to the Cedar Avenue corridor. Mr. Brauer pointed out the changes he made to Wilson Park. He also reported Community Services Director Fondrick's concern that park facilities and ball fields need to be replaced -- not just acreage -- if Washington Park is relocated to Wilson. Chairperson Linnihan asked staff to provide an opinion on closing Bloomington at Wilson Park, as well as redirecting Cedar Avenue. Mr. Brauer noted that these issues will be revisited when the group looks at parks and transportation. Chairperson Linnihan reminded the group that they need to be consistent. A lot of time was spent discussing the removal or replacement of houses in the I -494 corridor but no one had raised that point along Cedar where they were proposing to replace several blocks of housing. He pointed out the need for the group to step outside of individual concerns and look at the City from a broader perspective. Commissioner Dmytrenko pointed out that when the group talks about alternative housing, they should also consider the needs many families have for this type of housing. Commissioner Wasko asked Mr. Brauer to comment on the viability of the Cedar corridor as office uses. Mr. Brauer explained that he thought the area would support Class B office uses but that it wouldn't happen all at once. Chairperson Linnihan pointed out that if a west airport terminal is built, it could draw office uses to the area. Discussion followed regarding the potential for the corridor to support a hotel with a restaurant and banquet space. The group decided to redesignate the Office classifications as Regional Commercial/Office to leave the opportunity for such a use. Commissioner Gepner stated that he had talked to staff about some of the airport issues and reported that staff felt the Metropolitan Airports Commission would not be offended by our plans for homes that had been soundproofed. Mr. Brauer presented the draft plan for the Penn and 66th Street area. The plan shows limiting access to both 66th and Penn by closing 63rd and 65th Street, which would mean making 64th Street a through- street. The plan shows high density residential on either side of the Penn and 66th intersection to act as transition areas. This designation could be questionable on the southeast side given the good quality of the houses. Mr. Brauer pointed out that the plan also has the commercial uses ending at 68th Street. Along 66th Street, Mr. Brauer eliminated several intersections and indicated that as the single family homes bordering the street turn over, they could convert to commercial and higher density residential. The plan also combines Sheridan Park with the school. Committee Member Kilian suggested that they depict the area between Sheridan Park and the high density residential housing as low density single family housing. The group agreed to consider the possibility. Page 4 September 12, 1995 Zoning Administrator Urban explained that on the 26th, the comprehensive plan would be scheduled from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m., and the Lyndale Avenue workshop would start at 8:00. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 9:40 p.m. Daniel Linnihan Acting Planning Commission Secretary 1 Nj Lo Q1 K) 4- 5 0 LL In ZZ, 2 Il 4- H 64 Zs 0 LO o 0 N6 lV to 0 0 0 0 r- 0 5 0 LL In ZZ, 2 Il 4- H 64 Zs 0 LO o lk, r d Air All WIN i qkr MP- 91iW f il& pill Fr;1, 0 0i, 7L- P, I OIL Ll0001. 1 1 l 9 A Mff Jear p j ER1IwpmW W. 1 'IL I fit t 5 ^ -I I11 i i11111 11P.4I Iii I 111111 III IN M11[I 1 i4 7s h4LLM Wi.. EIT.A.-Im Ob ON CE a C V-7 Guiding Principles Lyndale Avenue Strategic Development Plan High traffic, good visibility and low rents have created an excellent environment in which to live and conduct business in the 7400 - 7600 blocks of Lyndale, Aldrich and Garfield Avenues. The diversity of businesses and length of time they have been in business has created a strong client base which serves the needs of both the local community and south - central region. While there are many factors which make the Lyndale Avenue Corridor a fairly successful business and residential area, it is also experiencing many difficulties including parking, traffic, access and aesthetics. The following guiding principles are intended to set a positive direction for improvements to the corridor, recognizing the need for some change. The guiding principles were derived from empirical observations, the review of background information and listening to both businesspersons and residents talk about the Lyndale Avenue Corridor. They are based on what we learned by seeing, listening and reading. These guiding principles are established early in the process as a way to guide the development of the plan, and ultimately, serve as criteria by which development proposals can be judged. R Open the Gateway to Richfield - This area introduces residents and visitors to Richfield at one of the few points of entry from the outside. It should welcome and invite people, revealing the true character and spirit of the Richfield community. AV Make it Connect - The Lyndale Corridor includes a wide array of individual businesses. These should be knit together into a commercial district, creating a sense of unity and cohesiveness. AF Involve People - Both residents and businesses have a stake in the results of this process. Involvement throughout the process is a key ingredient for successful outcomes. All parties should be continuously involved to identify the full range of perspectives. Ar Improve the Function of the Area - Business accessibility is made possible through the relationship of the transportation corridors, sidewalks, alleys and parking areas. Safe and effective streets, parking areas and alleys will reduce congestion and parking problems; will improve safety and access; and will encourage people to park in one spot and shop at several stores. Invite the Pedestrian - While a business district may receive most of its "traffic" in the form of the automobile, the pedestrian mode is the primary form in which customers directly access businesses. A corridor should be active, inviting and confusion free to the pedestrian, allowing all persons the opportunity to reach and explore the business area. N Make Good Neighbors - The Lyndale Avenue Corridor encompasses a range of uses including a variety of businesses and dwelling units. An environment which fosters compatibility and harmony between uses will result in a healthy, vibrant community. a Make it Happen - Any project needs to demonstrate the economic feasibility to both business persons and the City. Any plans for the Lyndale Avenue corridor should include well planned, feasible options. 9 Serve the Neighborhood - This area is comprised of a commercial area, embraced almost entirely by neighborhoods; establishing a closely -knit district. Services which meet the local neighborhood needs should be encouraged to maintain a connection between these areas. Ar Make Existing Business Persons and Land Owners a Part of the Solution - There are some business persons and land owners who will be affected by this process more than others. No matter the outcome of the planning process, some businesses and owners may not be able to be part of the solution. To the extent possible, consideration should be given to having existing business persons and owners play a role in the redevelopment of the commercial area. iff Keep the "Smallness" Feel - The Lyndale Avenue corridor is defined by the small, independent buildings, distinctly different from the large box anchor store developments along I -494. This smallness feel should be maintained as a character of the corridor to make it feel like Richfield. NEWSLETTER LYNDALE AVENUE STRATEGIC for the Development Plan October, I"S Issue No. NOW IT ALL BEGAN The Lyndale Avenue Strategic Development Plan is now underway! This plan was initiated by the business community, primarily due to parking concerns along Lyndale Avenue. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) has hired Hoisington Koegler Group Inc., a local planning consultant, to assist the Planning Commission with this project. The Planning Commission will take the lead role for this project. WHAT WILL THE PLAN INVOLVE The Lyndale Avenue Strategic Development Plan will evaluate potential ways to upgrade the Lyndale Avenue business area between the 7400 and 7600 blocks. Several alternative concept plans will be developed ranging from simply fixing up what is currently there to significant redevelopment. Redevelopment options may actually call for the expansion of the business area in some cases. At this time, the City does not have any plans drawn for this area. The process (as described later in this newsletter) will determine the plan for the area. THE PLANNING PROCESS The Planning Process for the Lyndale Avenue Development Plan involves several steps, all of which are heavily steeped in public participation. The graphic on the back of this newsletter notes these steps and identifies meeting dates. OPPORTLINI7Y TO PARTICIPATE As indicated previously, the planning process for this project involves extensive public participation. The meeting schedule identified in the planning process graphic will allow you the opportunity to share your opinions or concerns about this process. Look for modifications to these dates either in the "Sun Current" legal notices section or contact Julie Urban at City Hall 861 -9760) for an updated agenda. Reminder notices for the corridor meetings will be mailed to you. Prepared by Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. PUBLIC NEE77NG RESULTS - September 6th and 7th The planning process kicked -off with two public sessions for businesspersons and neighborhood residents. Approximately 40 businesspersons and 60 residents attended these sessions. In general, the meetings were very positive. Residents, more than businesspersons, think the area needs to change. Opportunities included accessibility, high visibility and low rents. Challenges included parking, conflicting use of the alley, appearance, signage, backs of buildings, and the lack of room for expansion. Issues consisted of land use compatibility, loss of existing businesses, the City's needs vs the businesses needs and understanding who decides. The input received from these meetings provided the basis for the Guiding Principles listed in the next section of this newsletter. Detailed summaries and individual responses from the September 6th and 7th meetings are available upon request. If interested, contact Julie Urban. GUIDING PRINCIPLES The guiding principles were principally derived from empirical observations, the review of background information and listening to both businesspersons and residents talk about the Lyndale Avenue Corridor. They are based on what we learned by seeing, listening and reading. These guiding principles are established early in the process as a way to guide the development of the plan, and ultimately, serve as criteria by which development proposals can be judged. They are listed below and on the next page, in no particular order, as follows: Open the Gateway to Richfield - This area introduces residents and visitors to Richfield at one of the few points of entry from the outside. It should welcome and invite people, revealing the true character and spirit of the Richfield community. Keep the "Smallness" Feel -The Lyndale Avenue corridor is defined by the small, independent buildings, distinctly different from the large box anchor store developments along 1 -494. This smallness feel should be maintained as a character of the corridor to make it feel like Richfield. Page 2 Lyndale Avenue Strategic Developriient Plan Newsletter GUIDING PRINCIPLES (Continued) i Improve the Function of the Area - Business accessibiliry is made possible through the relationship of the transportation corridors, sidewalks, alleys and parking areas. Safe and effective streets, parking areas and alleys will reduce congestion and parking problems: will improve safety and access: and will encourage people to park in one spot and shop at several stores. i htvite the Pedestrian - While a business district may receive most of its "traffic" in the form of the automobile, the pedestrian mode is the primaryform in which customers directly access businesses. A corridor should be active, inviting and confusion free to the pedestrian, allowing all persons the opportunity to reach and explore the business area. N Make Existing Business Persons and Land Owners a Pan of the Solution - There are some business persons and land owners who will be affected by this process more than others. No matter the outcome of the planning process, some businesses and owners tnay not be able to be part of the solution. To the extent possible, consideration should be given to having existing business persons and owners play a role in the redevelopment of the commercial area. Al Serve the Neighborhood - This area is comprised of a commercial area, embraced almost entirely by neighborhoods: establishing a closely -knit district. Services which meet the local neighborhood needs should be encouraged to maintain a connection between these areas. October, 1995 Issue No. I NNake Good Neighbors - The Lyndale Avenue Corridor encompasses a range of uses including a variety of businesses and dwelling units. An environment which fosters conpatibility and harmony between uses will result in a healthy, vibrant comet« nin,. i Involve People - Both residents and businesses have a stake in the results of this process. Involvement throughout the process is a kev ingredient for successfitl outcomes. All parties should be continuously involved to identify the full range of perspectives. i Make it Connect - The Lyndale Corridor includes a wide array of individual businesses. These should be knit together into a conunercial district, crearing a sense of u niry and cohesiveness. Arhlake it Happen -An ' y project needs to demonstrate the economic feasibility to both business persons and the City. Any plans for the Lyndale Avenue corridor should include well planned, feasible options. QUESTIONS /CONCERNS If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact any of the below listed individuals. We will be happy to help you! HOISINGTON KOEGL_R GROUP: Fred Hoisington, Michael Schroeder, Tracey Secula 835 -9960 C17YOFRICHFIELD: Julie Urban 861 -9760 PLANNINGCOMMISS,'ON: Dan Linnihan 866 -1656 LYNDALE AVENUE STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PROCESS 1.0 2.0 3.0 identify Involve Explore What Stakeholders the Exists Possibilities 4.0 Demonstrate How Area Strate_e_v Should Look Seek Agrecment to Move Forward Data Public Alternative Refine Action Draft Collection information Plans Preferred Steps Plan Meetings Plan Market Sept 6 and 7) Corridor Corridor Public Analysis Individual Meeting #1 Design Meeting #2 Hearing Meetings Nov 8 or 9) Guidelines Jan 17 or 18) TBA) Sept II -I3) Workshop Workshop Final Workshop Nov 14) Graphic Jan 2:) Plan Sept 26) Newsletter illustrations Newsletter 2 1 Newsletter Guiding 3 Principles Meetings - Open to Everyone