12-22-1998J
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
December 1998
7:00 p.m.
Roll Call
Approval of Minutes
Regular Planning Commission meeting of November 24, 1998. Planning Commission
study session of December 8, 1998.
Public Hearing
ITEM #1 98 -PUD -2 6625 Lyndale Avenue (66th to 67th Streets, Lyndale to
Pleasant Avenues)
Richfield State Agency
Planned Unit Development Plan for Urban Village, a
mixed land use development
ITEM # 98 -FDP -2 6625 Lyndale Avenue (66th to 67th Streets, Lyndale to
98- CUP -12 Pleasant Avenues)
Richfield State Agency
Final Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit for
Urban Village
New Business
Old Business
Liaison Reports
School Board
Community Services Advisory Commission
H RA
City Council
Adiournment
Planning Commission
CITY OF Minutes
Regular Meeting
November 24, 1998
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Daniel Linnihan; Commissioners: Terry
Ahlstrom, Brenda Bjorklund, Pamela Dmytrenko, David
Gepner, Roger Gordon, Mitchell Hadley, Bill Kilian and Ken
Meter.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor
STAFF PRESENT: John Stark, Community Development Manager
Julie Urban, Zoning Administrator
Mark Andrle, Community Development Technician
The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Linnihan
at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/ Kilian, S/ Gordon to approve the minutes of the regular Planning Commission
meeting of October 27, 1998.
Motion carried: 9 -0
Commissioner Meter requested that the minutes be changed to clarify that he is
in favor of the Urban Village concept but felt the Richfield Lake Area may not be a good
location for a village type development. In addition, Commissioner Meter wanted to
clarify that the scale of the proposed businesses may be too large for the Richfield Lake
Area, not the scale of the buildings.
M/ Meter, S/ Bjorklund to approve the amended minutes of the Planning
Commission study session of November 10, 1998.
Motion carried: 9 -0
November 24, 1998
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
Chairperson Linnihan asked staff for an update on the seating and parking
issues at the Eastern Buffet located in the Richfield Shoppes. Zoning Administrator
Julie Urban reviewed the parking and seating situations at the Eastern Buffet and the
Commission agreed to let the owner of the Eastern Buffet bring an amended
Conditional Use Permit before the Commission at the December 8, 1998 study session.
OLD BUSINESS
PC Letter #50
ITEM #1 PASS Update
Community Development Specialist Perry Thorvig updated the Commission on
the open houses for the PASSS redevelopment area. Mr. Thorvig stated that
approximately 50 business owners attended the open house the first night and about
85 -90 residents attended on the second night.
Commissioner Bjorklund felt staff and representatives from Ryan Company did
an excellent job with answering questions and she felt having Ryan there was very
helpful for the business owners.
Commissioner Gepner said he was impressed with the number of resident who
showed up at the open house. He felt overall, the open house went well.
November 24, 1998
Page 3
Commissioner Ahlstrom said many of the people he talked to felt that there is a
need to redevelop the area along Penn Avenue. Commissioner Dmytrenko added that
the displays were very nice and Ryan did a good job.
Mr. Thorvig said he'll be reviewing the information and data from the surveys the
residents and business owners filled out. He added that he spoke with a few home
owners who had issues about selling their homes and how they were going to do that
with the proposed redevelopment of the area.
Commissioner Gepner asked if the City could buy the homes that would be
affected by the project and then rent them out. Mr. Thorvig said that may be one option
for the City but the City normally tries to get the developer to do any pre - purchasing
needed.
Chairperson Linnihan suggested that there be a newsletter or information piece
sent out to the residents and business owners updating them on the progress of the
project. Mr. Thorvig said the City will be setting up a hot line for people to call in with
questions and there will be information sent out updating people about the project.
The Commission then agreed to a tentative date of January 16, 1999 for a forum
with Ryan Company and the citizen task force to discuss the next steps for the PASSS
project.
PC Letter #51
Item #2 Zoning Ordinance Amendments to
Sections 511, 521, and 546
Ms. Urban reviewed the amendments to the zoning ordinance that the Planning
Commission would recommend to the City Council.
Commissioner Kilian suggested that some language be added to the
requirements for a recreational fence for better aesthetics when the fence is near
residents.
M/ Meter, S/ Bjorkl.und to recommend that the City Council amend the Zoning
Ordinance, sections 511, 521, and 546.
Motion carried: 9 -0
November 24, 1998
Page 4
LIAISON REPORTS
School Board: Commissioner Dmytrenko reported that an audit was completed
for the school district and they ended up with $500,000 more than they anticipated.
The Board is planning for reorganization and they are putting a booklet together. In
addition, the Board reviewed transportation issues for the sports teams and a task force
will have a recommendation in February for changes in the school start times.
Community Services Advisory Commission: Commissioner Ahlstrom
reported that the Commission approved the Master Parks Plan with corrections. They
also discussed the status of a five -year maintenance plan for streets, parks and
government buildings.
HRA: Commissioner Kilian reported that the HRA chose CSM Corporation to
develop both sides of Lyndale Avenue. They also approved tax increment financing for
the Urban Village. Commissioner Kilian explained that an affordable housing
component had been added to the apartment complex.
City Council: Mayor Kirsch reported that the Council approved tax increment
financing for the Urban Village and then they had an executive session regarding the
airport.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:45 p.m.
Mitchell Hadley
Planning Commission Secretary
Planning Commission
Minutes
Study Session & Public Hearings
December 8, 1998
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners: Brenda Bjorklund, David Gepner, Roger
Gordon, Bill Kilian, Mitchell Hadley (8:25 p.m.), and Ken
Meter (9:15 p.m.).
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairperson Daniel Linnihan; Commissioners: Terry
Ahlstrom, and Pamela Dmytrenko
COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor
STAFF PRESENT: John Stark, Community Development Manager
Julie Urban, Zoning Administrator
Mark Andrle, Comm unity'Development Technician
The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by acting Chairperson
Bjorklund at 7:00 p.m.
STUDY SESSION ITEMS
PC Letter # 52
ITEM #1 Garage Site Selection
Operations Coordinator Randy Hughes was present to take comments and
answer questions the Commission may have about the selection of the new garage
site.
Chairperson Bjorklund stated her opinion that the Cedar Avenue site had a low
probability of being successful. That leaves the alternative site as being the first
choice. She stated that the existing site should be reevaluated in comparison to a
Veterans Park site. The Commissioners felt that the water plant site for the new public
works building would be the best spot because of the location near other City functions,
it would cost less in the short and long term than the other proposed sites, would not
December 8, 1998
Page 2
require the purchase of any homes or businesses and would create a campus type
environment for that area.
Commissioner Kilian felt the new site must follow along with the City's
Comprehensive Plan which designated areas for a new City garage.
Commissioner Gordon felt that it is not an appropriate time to be trying to make a
deal with MAC for their land east of Cedar. The Commissioners also felt that once
citizens know how much more the Cedar and existing sites will cost they may favor the
water plant site.
ITEM #2 PC Letter # 53
Enterprise Facilitation, Rob Smolund
Enterprise Facilitator Rob Smolund spoke about his role as Enterprise Facilitator
for the City of Richfield. Mr. Smolund described how he helps budding business
owners and existing businesses begin a business or relocate to Richfield. Mr. Smolund
said he helps the future business person by making sure they have the passion and
skills needed to make their business work.
Mr. Smolund then went on to talk about how enterprise facilitation began in
Australia and how it came to Minnesota. Mr. Smolund stated that there are eight other
enterprise facilitators in the metro area and since June he has had 40 clients contact
him and he is currently working with 23 clients.
PC Letter #54
ITEM #3 Mater Park Plan, Maureen Scaglia
Master Park Plan Subcommittee Chair Maureen Scaglia gave a brief summary of
the updates made to the Richfield Master Park Plan. Ms. Scaglia said that some of the
main points in the Plan are to replace the golf course and ball fields and not to lose any
park land.
Ms. Scaglia felt that in the future there needs to be a subcommittee of the
Community Service Committee which could better handle the updates to the Master
Park Plan.
December 8, 1998
Page 3
ADJOURNMENT
The Study Session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8 :05 p.m.
The Planning Commission special meeting was called to order by Chairperson
Bjorklund at 8:15 p.m.
SPECIAL MEETING
ITEM #4 98- APUD -1 98- ACUP -1 98- AFDP -1
710 Lake Shore Drive and 6724 Lyndale Avenue
Gramercy Corporation
Amended planned unit development plan to allow
a reduction in square footage.
Zoning Administrator Julie Urban reviewed the History of the Gramercy project
and then reviewed the proposed reduction of the buildings and parking ramp. Ms.
Urban stated that staff recommend approval of the APUD, ACUP and AFDP.
Commissioner Gordon asked what was the maximum cost that would be
financed by FHA. President of Gramercy Corporation Mike Conlan said he did not have
that number on hand but said they were $1.8 million over the maximum cost. Mr.
Conlan said the second level of the VFW and the parking ramp under the alley were the
main causes for the high cost.
Chairperson Bjorklund asked if the VFW was okay with the elimination of the
second floor. Mr. Conlan said they are fine with having one floor and it may even work
out better for them.
Commissioner Kilian asked if the cost per unit would change. Mr. Conlan said
no because they will eliminate two floors to match the loss of parking. Commissioner
Kilian also asked if the proposed stores on the first and second level would remain. Mr.
Conlan said they are still in the plans but all of the Community Rooms will be located on
the first floor.
December 8, 1998
Page 4
Commissioner Gepner felt that the proposed VFW building doesn't look right
next to the much larger senior housing building. He suggested that there be some
spacing between the two buildings along with some landscaping. Mr. Conlan said the
architects will be working on some designs to improve the aesthetics between the two
buildings.
M /Hadley, S /Kilian to close the public hearing.
Motion carried: 5 -0
There was no further discussion.
M /Kilian, S /Bjorklund to recommend approval of the APUD, AFDP and ACUP at
710 Lake Shore Drive and 6724 Lyndale Avenue with the following stipulations:
1. That a planned unit development plan and rezoning to PMR be approved
by the City Council.
2. That a final landscape plan , including tree replacement both on and off
site, be approved by the Community Development Director and a cash escrow
submitted for the cost of the landscaping_
3. That a stromwater management plan be approved by the Public Works
Director.
4. That a sediment and erosion control plan be approved by the Public
Works Director.
5. That appropriate measures be taken to ensure that cooking odors from
the VFW will not negatively impact future cooperative residents or other
surrounding properties.
6. That the property be replatted.
7. That final design of the VFW portion of the structure be consistent with
that of the housing portion and approved by the Community Development
Director.
8. That a resolution approving the conditional use permit be recorded with
the County, pursuant to Minnesota statutes section 462.36, subdivision 1.
Motion carried: 5 -0
98- ACUP -2
ITEM #5 6519 Nicollet Avenue
Eastern Buffet
Amended condition use permit to allow an increase in
restaurant seating from 90 to 120 seats.
December 8, 1998
Page 5
Ms. Urban reviewed the amended conditional use permit request by the Eastern
Buffet to add 60 seats to its 90 -seat restaurant. Ms. Urban added that the application
stated that 13 additional parking spaces would be added to accommodate the
additional seating, but staff would only accept nine of them as reasonable parking
spaces.
Ms. Urban stated that the Eastern Buffet also plans to encourage employee
parking in the back of the building and bus and bike usage. Ms. Urban stated that staff
recommends approval of 30 additional seats which would bring the total to 120 with the
stipulations of employee parking to be located behind the building, a new fence design
and other safety measures are improved behind the building and additional dry storage
space is added.
Commissioner Gepner asked why the City regulates parking spaces. Ms. Urban
said its regulated so the City streets can accommodate traffic and other parking.
Commissioner Gepner also asked how did the applicant's original 90 seats come about.
Ms. Urban said that was the amount they requested.
Commissioner Gordon asked if there was enough room for emergency vehicles
to get into the parking lot. Ms. Urban stated that at the development review meeting the
Fire Marshall said that access was acceptable.
Jesse Symynkywkz from RLK- Kuusisto, Ltd. reviewed the parking study they did
for the Richfield Shoppes complex. Mr. Symynkywkz also gave some
recommendations for improvements to the parking lot if the seating for the Eastern
Buffet is increased. Mr. Symynkywkz recommended that the Commission approve the
amended conditional use permit for Eastern Buffet.
Chairperson Bjorklund asked what the parking counts where for the lunch and
dinner hours. Mr. Symynkywkz said that during lunch there were 20 -26 open spaces
and during dinner there were 23 -47 open spaces.
Commissioner Hadley suggested that the seating configuration be changed
because in Mr. Symynkywkz presentation, he stated that many seats were unused
because coats were on them or only two people sat at a four person booth.
Commissioner Hadley felt by reconfiguring the seating more people could be
seated without adding addition seats.
Matt Reiger of Midwest Management, representing the shopping center owners,
stated that he can require employees to parking in the back and safety will be improved
behind the building by constructing a new fence and increasing lighting. Mr. Reiger
added that each business owner contracts out their own trash removal and that is why
December 8, 1998
Page 6
there are so many collection bins behind the building. He added that they are planning
to combine trash areas to provide more space for parking.
Commissioner Kilian asked if the employees will be able to get into the back
doors of the building or will they have to walk all the way around to the front to get in.
Mr. Reiger said there are door bells at the back doors and employers could give
employees a key.
Chairperson Bjorklund asked if truck traffic and increased lighting would create a
hardship for the residents behind the building. Mr. Reiger said they have not talked to
the residents but they do plan to use a type of lighting that would only light up.the
parking lot.
Commissioner Gepner suggested that a walk -thru be built in the middle of the
building so employees could get through the building with out walking around. Mr.
Reiger said it would be very expensive because the building is very long and the shops
are very narrow.
Commissioner Gepner asked if the proposed safety measures would still be
added if the increase in the number of seats at the Eastern Buffet is denied. Mr. Reiger
said they will be.
Commissioner Kilian asked how will the changes to the parking lot affect snow
removal. Mr. Reiger said they will have to haul out more snow than usual but they will
still have some spots to pile the snow without taking away parking spaces.
Commissioner Meter stated his belief that many of the cars in the lot are from
other businesses and activities. Mr. Reiger stated that his observations found that only
8 -10 cars in the lot are not Richfield Shoppes patrons and the owners of those cars are
from Norwest Bank or use the bus. Commissioner Gordon asked Mr. Reiger if he has
tried to solve this problem. Mr. Reiger said he has not because there hasn't been a
parking problem until recently.
Corrina Cheg, the owner of the Eastern Buffet, asked that the Planning
Commission support her and her business.
Commissioner Kilian asked when the busiest time at the Eastern Buffet is. Ms.
Cheng said that noon on Fridays is the busiest and the rest of the time is fairly busy.
Commissioner Kilian asked if there is ever a line of people waiting to be seated. Ms.
Cheng said there is never a line. Mr. Kilian asked if there is no line then how could
more seats create more business. Ms. Cheng said that she turns people away at the
door when the restaurant is full because she feels it is unfair for them to wait.
December 8, 1998
Page 7
Commissioner Gepner asked why Ms. Cheng originally requested only 90 seats.
Ms. Cheng said that this was the first sit down restaurant she has run and she thought
that 90 seats would be enough.
Cloristine Wilson, Minneapolis, stated that the Eastern Buffet is often full and
needs more seating. Ms. Wilson stated that she did see Ms. Cheng turn people away
at the door.
Jim and Betty Ronney, Richfield Hair Care, stated that there is not enough
employee parking in the back right now and any addition spaces will block emergency
vehicles from getting to the building. Mr. Ronney felt that there needs to be more
handicapped parking in the lot and feels additional seating at the Eastern Buffet will
negatively affect the other businesses because of the lack of parking spaces.
Glen Sholery, Simek's Meats & Seafood, presented his personal parking count
and he found that the lot was nearly full every day of the week and on Friday the lot
was completely full. Mr. Sholery added that when he went to the Eastern Buffet on a
Friday evening he counted 160 seats in the restaurant.
Peggy Reis and Marylin Weis, Richfield Flowers, presented their parking count
and they found that the spaces in the center of the lot were very full while the end
spaces were somewhat empty. Ms. Reis stated that she has had customers who
complained about the lack of parking and she feels there are too many seat in the
Eastern Buffet right now. Ms. Weis feels that parking could be a major problem during
the peak seasons for her store.
Sing Hue Cheng, Eastern Buffet, said originally he never knew how many seats
to request and feels if he has less than 130 seats he will have to close the restaurant.
Chairperson Bjorklund asked staff what is done if the seating in not in
compliance. Ms. Urban said there can be a warning given and the City Manager can
revoke the conditional use permit, but this is a long processes and does not provide a
quick solution.
M /Hadely, S /Kilian to close the public hearing.
Motion carried: 6 -0
Commissioner Kilian said that when he ate at the Eastern Buffet most of the
seats were filled but the booths were ,not and he felt that more seating would not create
more business.
Commissioner Meter stated that although there are clearly difficulties with
parking at the mall, it had not been shown this was due to the restaurant.
December 8, 1998
Page 8
M /Meter, S /Kilian to deny the request of 150 seat but approve 132 seats
because the previous business was allowed 132 seats.
Chairperson Bjorklund asked if 120 seats is based on the parking standards.
Ms. Urban stated_ that the 120 seats is based on a compromise between the small
amount of excess parking in the front and the proposed parking spaces. Ms. Urban
added that the previous business that had 132 seats should not influence a decision
that needs to be made based on the issues in the present.
Commissioner Gordon felt that there is too much conflict with numbers on the
parking and seating counts and would like to see some other sound figures before
voting.
Motion denied: 2 -3 (Bjorklund, Hadley, Gepner opposed. Gordon abstained.)
M /Bjorklund, S /Gepner to deny the request for an amended conditional use
permit to increase the seating to 150 seats at 6519 Nicollet Avenue and approve
an increase in seating capacity to 120 seats with the following stipulations:
1. That shopping center management continue its efforts to encourage
employees to park in the back parking lot.
2. That black vinyl - coated chain link fence be installed along to east side of
the shopping center.
3. That the trash bins be consolidated to allow for more parking spaces.
4. That snow be hauled off the parking lot and does not interfere with any
parking spaces.
Motion carried: 4 -1 (Meter opposed. Gordon abstained.)
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 10:30 p.m.
Mitchell Hadley
Planning Commission Secretary
0171' OF
Planning Commission Lette
RICHFIELD December • •
Agenda Section: Public Hearing
Item #: I
Case #: 98 -PUD -2
GENERAL INFORMATION
Type of Request: Planned unit development plan to allow construction of a mixed use
development around the existing Richfield State Bank and Woodlake
Medical Clinic.
Applicant /Owner: Richfield State Agency
Location: 66th to 67th Streets and Lyndale to Pleasant Avenues
Zoning: PC -2 and R
Existing Land Use: Commercial and single family residential
Proposed Land Use: Mixed land use
Comp. Plan: Regional Commercial /Office
References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts)
Zoning: 546.05, Subds. 4 and 6
Public Notice: Notice of the Planning Commission's consideration and public
hearing was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 350
feet of the subject property.
City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council public hearing
date of January 14, 1998.
ANALYSIS
History: In 1981, the City Council approved a planned unit development plan for 6625
Lyndale Avenue to allow a development of bank, office and commercial
space. In 1985, the Council approved an amendment to the PUD plan to allow
the addition of a McDonald's in the lower level of the bank building. In 1993,
the Council approved a second amendment to allow construction of Woodlake
Medical Clinic.
Richfield Lake master planning has been underway since 1997. During the
first quarter of 1998, the HRA responded to the concerns of homeowners
located in areas identified for possible change and considered a program to
serve homeowners with a need or interest in selling. Rather than authorize an
early acquisition program, staff was asked to evaluate the interest of
developers in this area. Five development teams submitted proposals for the
block between Pleasant and Grand Avenues and 66th and 67th Streets. The
proposals ranged from low density townhomes, to mid -rise multi -unit housing,
to a comprehensive redevelopment of the Southeast quadrant of 66th Street
and Lyndale Avenue submitted by Richfield State Agency (RSA).
The HRA expressed an interest in the RSA proposal and on September 21,
1998, directed staff to prepare a development agreement with RSA. At the
October 13, 1998 study session the Planning Commission heard a presentation
by RSA on the project concept. On October 29, 1998, the Planning
Commission found the proposed tax increment financing for the project to be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Proposal: The comprehensive proposal submitted by RSA includes a mixture of new
housing choices, retail, office and public spaces. The proposal provides
90,000 square feet of additional office/retail space, 216 housing units, a 550 to
650 space parking ramp, and the relocation of McDonald's to the corner of
67th and Lyndale. The housing types would include assisted living housing
and townhome style apartments for the Pleasant /Grand block.
Issues: 1. The Comprehensive Plan designation for the area is Regional
Commercial /Office. The R -C /O designation encourages mixed use
development.
2. The property at 6701 Lyndale is currently a parking lot and is part of the
existing RSA PUD plan. RSA is proposing to move the brick house that is
located adjacent to the bank and clinic parking lot at 67th and Harriet to
6701 Lyndale Avenue. The property will then be sold to the owners of
chiropractic clinic who are being relocated from their office at 66th Street
and Grand Avenue. Since the ownership of 6701 Lyndale will be separate
from that of the Urban Village, the property will be removed from the
PUD plan and rezoned to C -1 (neighborhood commercial). An Off - Street
Parking Permit would be obtained for the property.
3. Setbacks in the PUD plan vary from those normally required in the C -2
district in an attempt to encourage pedestrian access and create a
neighborhood -like. street level presence for the buildings. Exterior
setbacks are established and shown on the conceptual site plan (C1). The
streetside /exterior setbacks vary from 15 feet for the commercial building
at 66th and Lyndale, to 15 feet, 72 feet and 20 feet for the apartments, to
25 feet for the assisted living building, to 30 and 35 feet for the
McDonald's building. Streetside setbacks for multi- family housing in the
C -2 district would be 30 feet and for commercial buildings would be 25
feet.
l
ACTION TO BE TAKEN
Recommendation: Recommend that the City Council:
approve the request for a planned unit development plan for the
Urban Village;
rezone property between 66th and 67th Streets and Grand to
Pleasant Avenues from R to PC -2, and
rezone property at 6701 Lyndale Avenue from PC -2 to C -1
with the following stipulation:
1. That the rezoning not be effective until the developer obtains title
to all R -zoned property.
Basis: 1. The proposed planned unit development concept is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan designation for the area of Regional
Commercial - Office.
2. The Regional Commercial - Office designation encourages mixed
use developments with commercial uses and multiple family
housing.
3. Commercial and multi - family housing are allowable uses in the
underlying C -2 zoning district.
4. The project provides new housing choices, public spaces, transit
integration and retail in an urban village context.
5. The proposed housing types filling two missing market pieces in
Richfield: market rate rental townhomes and assisted living.
6. The PUD Plan is consistent with the Richfield Lake Master Plan.
7. The development will not create an excessive burden on parks,
schools, streets, or other public facilities and utilities which serve
or are proposed to serve the development.
8. The development will not have undue adverse impacts on
neighboring properties. The restructuring of 67th Street will
provide a buffer between the development and the single family
neighborhood to the south and will keep traffic from the
development from spilling over into the neighborhood.
9. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet has been published and
the City, HRA and developer continue to work on the traffic and
stormwater issues. No issues of significance are left unaddressed
in the proposal.
Alternative: Recommend that the City Council deny :the request for a planned unit
development plan for the Urban Village with a finding of fact that the
proposed development would have an adverse impact on surrounding
properties or the City as a whole.
CITATIONS
ZONING CODE:
SECTION 536 - ZONING: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS
536.17. Review of PUD application. Subdivision 1. Procedure. Upon receipt of a completed PUD
application and the fee set by Appendix D of the City Code, the following review procedure set out in this
subsection shall commence.
Subd. 2. Planning Commission review. The Planning Commission shall conduct a public
hearing on the PUD application and serve mailed notice of such hearing to the applicant and all
property owners situated wholly or partially within 350 feet of the proposed PUD district. The
Planning Commission shall submit its recommendation to the Council. The Planning
Commission may recommend approval with or without modifications, or may recommend denial
of the PUD application. (Amended, Bill No. 1995 -19, Sec. 2)
Subd. 3. Council consideration. Following action by the Planning Commission, the Council
shall hold a public hearing and consider rezoning the area described in the plan. if the PUD plan
is approved, the area shall be rezoned as one of the six types of PUD districts.
Subd. 4. Required findings. The findings necessary for approval of a PUD application shall be
as follows:
a) the proposed development conforms with the goals and objectives of the City's
Comprehensive Development Plan and any applicable redevelopment plans;
b) the proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and
unified environment within its own boundaries;
c) the development is in substantial conformity with the purpose and intent of the
original district, and departures from the original district regulations are justified by
the design of the development;
d) the development will not create an excessive burden on parks, schools, streets, or
other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the
dcvclopmcnt;
c) the development will not have undue adverse impacts on neighboring properties; and
f) the terms and conditions proposed to maintain the integrity of the plan are sufficient to
protect the public interests.
536.19. Final development plan and conditional use permit. Subdivision 1. Upon approval of the
PUD application and rezoning. but prior to the commencement of any construction or development of
land. an applicant shall submit a final development plan, together with an application for a conditional use
permit for the dcvclopmcnt shown in the final development plan, which is consistent with the PUD
application. Approval of such final development plan and conditional use permit requires a two- thirds
vote of the Council.
Suhd. 2. A final development plan shall consist of the following:
a) if rcquircd. a final plat of the land to be developed;
b) all materials required under Section 536.15, Subd. 6 of this code in "final" form; and
c) additional information as required by the Director or Council.
Existing Zoning
Urban Village
IQ,
am
M
66th St
A
Zoning
C-2
PC-2
100 0 100 200 Feet
PMR
R N
December 4, 1998
J-0
a
CITY OF
Planning Commission Letter
RICHFIELD December 22, 1998
Agenda Section: Public Hearing
Item #: 2
Case #: 98- FDP -2; 98 -CUP -2
GENERAL INFORMATION
Type of Request: Final development plan and conditional use permit for Urban Village
mixed land use development
Applicant/Owner: Richfield State Agency
Location: 66th to 67th Streets and Lyndale to Pleasant Avenues
Zoning: PC -2
Existing Land Use: Commercial and single family residential
Proposed Land Use: Mixed land use
Comp. Plan: Regional Commercial /Office
References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts)
Zoning ode: 536.15, subd. 6; 536.19, subds 1 and 2.
Public Notice: Notice of the Planning Commission's consideration and public
hearing was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 350
feet of the subject property.
City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council public hearing
date of January 11, 1998.
ANALYSIS
Proposal: Richfield State Agency (RSA) is proposing a comprehensive redevelopment
of the southeast quadrant of 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue, from Lyndale to
Pleasant Avenues and 66th to 67th Streets. The redevelopment would
maintain the existing bank and clinic buildings and add new housing choices,
retail, office and public spaces.
The proposal provides 90,000 square feet of additional office /retail space
where the current McDonald's parking lot is located. Underground parking
for 109 cars would be provided in the lower level. Retail space would be
located on the first level and likely include a coffee shop, an approximately
250 -seat restaurant, possibly a second restaurant and additional retail. The
clinic would occupy the second level and the bank would occupy the third
level.
One hundred and thirty -eight housing units would be provided in the
Pleasant /Grand block. These townhome and apartment flat -style units would
include both one and two -level dwellings. Twelve of the units would be
affordable to households at 70 percent of the median income for the
metropolitan area. The remainder of the units would be affordable at 80
percent of median and above.
Underground parking for 165 cars would be provided below the multi - family
housing and an additional 29 spaces would be provided on grade on the east
side of the multi - family housing.
A three story building with 78 units of assisted living would be located along
67th Street. Fifty -two parking spaces would be provided underneath the
assisted living building.
A 550 to 650 -space parking ramp would be located in the middle of the
development and provide parking for all uses. Parking during evening hours
would be available for future development in the RLAP area.
The McDonald's currently located in the lower level of the bank would be
relocated to the corner of 67th and Lyndale. Sixty parking spaces would be
available directly to the east of the McDonald's.
The bank drive - through teller services would be moved closer to the bank
building to the north of McDonald's.
The site plan design is driven by the objective of providing the maximum
amount of public and private green space and the minimum amount of surface
parking. The architectural design creates and Urban Village character through
the use of brick, rich detail and a diversity of texture and form. The use of
brick and detail will be consistent between the residential and new commercial
and parking to create a cohesive neighborhood appearance.
Issues: • NlcDonald's: Neighbors have raised issues of odor, traffic, and trash
management. The developer is looking at technology options to address
odors. The proposed location positions the drive - through away from the
neighborhood and provides screening to further minimize parking and
traffic impacts.
67th Street: Based on discussions with the neighborhood, Public Works
and Public Safety staff, RSA is proposing to vacate the north 25 feet of
67th Street, east of Harriet Avenue. The south half would be converted
into a loop street between Pleasant and Grand Avenues and a connection
from the alley to Grand Avenue. The loop streets will not allow access
between the neighborhood and the Urban Village development.
Additional street right -of -way to be vacated includes Grand and Pleasant
Avenucs.
Landscaping: A preliminary landscape plan indicates that significant
landscaping and streetscape will be provided in the development. Efforts
will be made to save existing trees when possible. The exact location of
trees to be saved cannot be provided until additional survey work can be
done on the Pleasant /Grand Avenue block. Trees to be saved will be
protected during construction.
Transit elements: Bus pullouts and possibly a shelter could be
incorporated on 66th Street depending on the interest of Metro Transit.
EAW: The developer voluntarily agreed to perform an EAW, although
one is not required. The EAW was completed and has been published in
the Environmental Quality Board Monitor for comments. The conclusion
of the EAW is that projected impacts do not warrant preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement.
Traffic Analysis: The assessment of projected traffic volumes generated
by the development is included as an attachment. The analysis indicates
that key intersections will provide the same level of service as they
currently do. The expected increase in left turning traffic, particularly on
the south approach to the 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue intersection
may require revisions to the left turn signal phasing to decrease the amount
of left turn stacking. There is currently a median cut on Lyndale Avenue
that would provide complete access to bank teller area. If in the future
conditions warrant, the median cut would be closed. This would allow
right -in, right -out only access to this area.
Work with the Neighborhood: Property owners in the Pleasant /Grand
block were contacted several months ago about their interest in selling. To
date, RSA has reached or is near agreement to purchase 10 of the 15
homes. Negotiations are underway for the others.
ACTION TO BE TAKEN
Recommendation: Recommend that the City Council approve the request for a final
development plan and conditional use permit for Urban Village with
the following stipulations:
1. That a signage plan be approved by the Community Development
Director.
2. That detailed plans regarding pedestrian lighting, pedestrian
circulation trash receptacles, benches, and bike racks be submitted
and approved by the Community Development Director and Public
Works Director.
3. That a detailed landscape plan, including existing trees to be saved
where possible and streetscape, be approved by the Community
Development Director and a landscape escrow or letter of credit be
submitted.
4. That screening be provided on the south side of 67th Street
between 1vlcDonald's and the residential neighborhood and the
final design of fencing, berming and landscaping be approved by
the Community Development Director.
5. That final plans for the loading area be approved by the
Community Development Director.
6. That the property be replatted.
7. That a detailed right -of -way plan for 67th Street and the proposed
loop streets be approved by the Public Works Director.
8. That a stormwater management plan be approved by the Public
Works Director.
9. That a sediment and erosion control plan, including tree protection
measures as needed, be approved by the Public Works Director.
10. That a detailed design of the parking ramp be approved by the
Public Works Director.
11. That the developer work with Metro Transit and the Public Works
Department to incorporate transit in the development.
12. That the final internal traffic circulation plan be approved by the
Public Works Director.
13. That a plan for accommodating trash dumpsters, either inside
structures or within enclosures, be approved by the Directors of
Community Development and Public Safety.
14. That odor mitigation equipment be installed in the McDonald's
building as approved by the Public Safety Director.
15. That the buildings be designed to accommodate future skyway
connections as proposed in the RLAP Master Plan.
16. That a conditional use permit resolution be recorded with Hennepin
County.
Basis: 1. The proposed development uses, site design, landscaping and
streetscape are consistent with the design guidelines established in
the RLAP Master Plan.
2. Tile buildings are. designed to create a sense of neighborhood and
to tie the new residential buildings together with the commercial
buildings.
3. The development provides housing types that are currently lacking
in Richfield including assisted living and market rate rental
housing.
4. Tile appearance of parking is minimized through the use of under -
building parking and a shared public - private parking ramp.
5. The development strengthens the pedestrian experience along 66th
Street through sidewalk /streetscape improvements, landscaping,
lighting and new street level uses such as restaurants, coffee shop,
and service commercial.
6. An internal pedestrian circulation system is provided within the
development along with private and public outdoor green spaces.
7. Tile proposed planned unit development concept is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan designation for the area of Regional
Commercial- Office.
8. Tile Environmental Assessment Worksheet has been published and
the City, HRA and developer continue to work on the traffic and
stormwater issues. No issues of significance are left unaddressed
in the proposal.
Alternative: Recommend that the City Council deny the request for a final
development plan and conditional use permit for Urban Village with a
finding of fact that the proposed use would have an adverse impact on
surrounding properties or the City as a whole.
CITATIONS
ZONING CODE:
SECTION 536 -ZONING: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS
536.15. PUD application. Subdivision I . Required materials. Upon completion of the required actions
in Subsection 536.13 of this code, an applicant for a PUD shall submit the application materials outlined
in this Subsection.
Subd. 6. Site plan materials:
a) a site plan indicating the boundaries, dimensions, and area of the proposed PUD
district;
b) a preliminary plan showing the location, dimensions, and gross floor area of proposed
structures;
c) a preliminary plan showing the proposed land use(s) for each parcel and each
building, the amount of floor area devoted to each use, and all areas to be designated
for mixed land uses allowed by Subsection 536.11, Subd. 3 of this code;
d) a preliminary plan showing the location, arrangement, and number of parking spaces,
loading facilities, and mass transit facilities including bus turnouts and shelters;
e) a preliminary plan showing the location and dimension of all curb cuts and driveways,
and their relationship to all existing and proposed public streets;
f) the proposed location, design, and dimension of pedestrian and bicycle facilities,
walks, skyways, plazas, courts or other related areas;
g) preliminary building plans, elevations, general specifications of materials, and unusual
structural systems, prepared by an architect registered in the State of Minnesota;
h) a preliminanp land/building use profile including computations of gross/leaseable
square footage, Dousing unit breakdown to square foot, bedrooms, persons /unit, and
parking requirements;
i) a preliminary storm water management plan and site grading plan including an
analysis of the adequac\' of surface drainage, storm sewer and catch basin drainage,
storm water retention, and erosion control;
j) a preliminary plan depicting natural features and natural features to be preserved, as
well as existing vegetation with detailed locations of trees 12" or larger in diameter;
k) a preliminary utility plan showing easements, sewer, water, and power services to all
proposed uses;
1) a preliminary plan showing utilities and utility easements to remain, to be installed, to
be relocated. and to be removed or vacated;
m) a preliminan- plan showing the proposed location and dimensions of all walls, fences
and landscape plantings:
n) a plan showing the proposed location and dimensions of all signs and lighting fixtures,
including the illumination characteristics of all lighting;
o) a soils map that depicts surface and subsurface conditions that may affect
construction; and
p) additional information as required by the Director.
536.19. Final development plan and conditional use permit. Subdivision 1. Upon approval of the
PUD application and rezoning, but prior to the commencement of any construction or development of
land, an applicant shall submit a final development plan, together with an application for a conditional use
permit for the development shown in the final development plan, which is consistent with the PUD
application. Approval of such final development plan and conditional use permit requires a two- thirds
vote of the Council.
Subd. 2. A final development plan shall consist of the following:
a) if required, a final plat of the land to be developed;
b) all materials required under Section 536.15, Subd. 6 of this code in "final' form; and
c) additional information as required by the Director or Council.
i
T
zr ID
r i Sr
l Ul;
0 p M /
b
c 1
i
P! +
i 1 1
L all
v 1 l
i —a
t
ifl
yll e'17 11i!df jA i 3 i 3311
a
u a
O
O
3N
z
w
J
W
q
LUar
Q
ti
Oar
a 4
n U
a
z a
v UJ
a z
z w
xo
o
o a
z a
O
U tJ
z
ryd
L
H
w
N
q
w
Z
o' h
0
a -
f6 ES EE3
r
f E9 E39
lei
a6
E3 Bf
E9
33 ED
m
p
9€
8
i€ p€
F
0 ®®®
a€
tl
9
3
EM EM
E3 fi
EE ff
i EEO EB
t
E
7r
mil ' g
P_ P g i
it
lei
N
l
CF Ejt i N 9 N
z E F-
w
N
q
w
Z
o' h
0
a -
z
i
z
U
2
z
LQ
V
J
a
z
m
j
q.
ter
1
zO
m
C7
am
a
o
j
w'
4
N '
z
6
U
L
F`
a
4
zZ
Lu
i
s
0
R
z
Cd
10
Cd
e
u
I
I
IRES
8
fit
EB`
8
o
IT-1 .
3nqgga
P:
EB
n n
I`
B S a F
E3 ED
7
i
yg
i eA..1J
i.4 B
i9
ED
t ® e
s I FpE
g if z
gE o ®3 E B
0
ni If
z z
IQ
11
y
W® Z
F
s s m i
4
5
3 3
z
i
z
U
2
z
LQ
V
J
a
z
m
j
q.
ter
1
zO
m
C7
am
a
o
j
w'
4
N '
z
6
U
L
F`
a
4
zZ
Lu
i
s
0
R
z
Cd
10
Cd
KEY RICHFIELD URBAN
VILLAGE DESIGN
PRINCIPLES
Rezm(ng /PUD Amendment Application
City of Rktl ield
NouemberIZ 1998
PROJECT VISION
Section 1
The Vision — The Creation of a Residential Commercial Mixed -Use Urban
Village at the Southeast Corner of 66'" and Lyndale
The compelling opportunity provided by the City -of Richfield within the Pleasant and
Grand redevelopment initiative is the creation of an integrated urban village master
plan at the Southeast quadrant of 66'" and Lyndale.
The design vision in this proposal combines the Pleasant and Grand block with the
Richfield State Agency parcel to create the integrated mixed -use precinct. This
precinct design will build on and support the City of Richfield vision for a more
attractive, pedestrian friendly and economically viable Downtown Richfield at.
Lyndale and 66".
Fundamental to the site and architectural design of the Pleasant and
Grand /Richfield State Agency Urban Village Plan are the following principles:
Providing new, mid - density residential building types to serve a diversity of
user groups potentially including seniors,and market rate and affordable
rental.
Development of a precinct wide parking strategy which provides under
building parking at all mid density residential buildings and a shared public -
private parking ramp to minimize surface parking and maximize public green
space.
Development of comprehensive landscape and streetscape design with the
City of Richfield which creates an integrated urban village character for the
SE quadrant and the 66" and Lyndale place.
Development of an architectural expression for the residential buildings which
establishes a quality and spirit for the Downtown Richfield Urban Village
Elness Swenson Graham An ttects Inc.
PROJECT VISION
Page 2
while appropriately relating to the Holy Angels Campus and the single - family
neighborhood to the south.
Development of architectural building types which create a hierarchy of
private and public outdoor spaces through the use of courtyards and gardens.
Develop Richfield urban village architectural design standards to create a
sense of neighborhood and to tie the new residential buildings together with
the proposed 66" and Lyndale street front commercial. It is essential to
create a unified architectural expression at the SE quadrant to provide a
sense of neighborhood.
Creation of internal urban village pedestrian "green' walkway systems
consistent with the City of Richfield Lake Area Concept Plan. Walkways to
link the new residential at Grand and Pleasant to the street and surrounding
amenities.
Provide user - friendly precinct transit related amenities.
Strengthen the pedestrian experience along 66" from Pleasant Avenue to
Lyndale Avenue through sidewalk/streetscape improvements, landscaping,
lighting and the introduction of new street level uses such as restaurants,
coffee shop, service commercial, community health and residential support
spaces.
Strengthen the pedestrian experience along Lyndale from 66'" to the Wood
Lake area through design strategies as stated above.
Strengthening 67'" Street definition from Pleasant to Lyndale through
architectural definition, landscaping, boulevard trees, and traffic calming.
Rezoning /PUD Amendment Application Etness Suxnson Graham ArchUects 1rw-
My RfrRfc &ld
Nouember 12, 1998
RICHFIELD URBAN VILLAGE A Mid Density Approach To Residential Architectural Type
PROGRAM
PROJECT VISION
Page 3
Through an analysis of the on -going Richfield Lake Area Redevelopment Study and
Concept Plan our team feels that a mid - density approach to new residential
development at the Pleasant and Grand block is most appropriate. Our definition of
mid - density is two to three story residential buildings over underground parking.
Within this architectural building type a variety of rental
units can be created including one level, two level and townhouse style residences.
The mid - density residential building type will allow for an architecturally integrated
urban village to be created from the new residential and proposed street front
commercial buildings. The mid - density residential buildings can provide the
appropriate transition from the 66'° and Lyndale core to the Holy Angels Campus
and the single - family neighborhood to the south.
Rezantng/PUD A- endment Application Elness Swenson Gnaham Architects Inc.
City gfRtdyteld
November 12. 1998
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
Section 2
RICHFIELD URBAN VILLAGE In addition to the residential redevelopment at the Pleasant and Grand site the
PROGRAM proposed Richfield Urban Village program includes the following new uses on the
Richfield State Agency site;
Approximately 23,000 sq. ft. of new street level restaurant and commercial
service uses along 66th and Lyndale.
Approximately 25,000 sq. ft. of expanded medical office space on the second
level above the new street level restaurant/commercial.
Approximately 25,250 sq. ft. of Richfield Bank office expansion on the third .
level.
A new relocated McDonalds restaurant at the corner of Lyndale and 67'"
An approximately 78 -unit assisted living and health services courtyard style
residential building with underground parking.
A shared private - public parking garage for approximately 706 cars to serve
the restaurant, commercial, residential - visitor, and general public parking
needs.
An urban village network of pedestrian walkways and green spaces to link all
uses together and to connect the SE quadrant to the surrounding context.
Transit related waiting areas and drop -off amenities.
Rezontng /PUD Amendment AppUcatlon Elness Swenson Graham Arddtects Inc.
CJ of R(cl&ld
November 12, 1998
Rezoning /PUD Amendment AppUcatlon
City of Rkf&ld
Nouernber 12. 1998
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
Page 2
Pleasant and Grand Block Residential Program
The residential program as illustrated calls for 138 dwelling units within a high -
quality courtyard style residential building at the Pleasant and Grand block.
The site plan design is driven by the objective of providing the maximum amount of
public and private green space and the minimum amount of surface parking. The
site plan is highly integrated into an overall urban village site design which provides
desired internal pedestrian green connections, courtyards and garden opportunities.
The architectural design is driven by the objective of creating a Richfield Urban
Village Character through the use of brick, rich detail and a diversity of texture and
form. The use of brick and rich detail will be consistent between the Pleasant and
Grand residential and the proposed new restaurant/commercial / parking to create a
cohesive neighborhood.
Residential Occupancy Types
The program for the Pleasant and Grand multi - family component calls for 138 rental
apartment dwelling units. The program being proposed modifies the 132 -unit rental
apartment program submitted earlier to provide a combination of market rate and
affordable units.
Primary Residential User Groups
The primary baseline market niche is a diverse rental market including singles,
couples, empty nesters and seniors who want to live in a quality rental community.
The location at 66'" and Lyndale is ideal for residents working downtown or in the
south suburban area.
Etness Swenson Graham Arddtects Inc.
SCHEDULE/ PHASING PLAN
Section 3
SCHEDULE /PHASING PLAN Developer would propose to start construction in the spring of 1999. See site plan
sheet C1 for phasing area limits.
Phase 1: Removal of houses and construction of parking ramp and McDonald's
Feb. 1999 -Oct. 1999).
Phase 2: Construction of multi - family housing (Apr. 1999 — Mar. 2000).
Phase 3: Construction of commercial office space, clinic, restaurant and retail
Oct. 1999 — Sept. 2000).
Phase 4: Construction of senior assisted living facility (Oct. 1999 -Sept. 2000).
Rezoning /PUD Amendment Application Elness Swenson Graham Archttects Inc.
City of Rkhfteld
November 12. 1998
ELNESS SWENSON GRAHAM ARCHITECTS INC.
Fomierly BRIV Elnert Ar:6itcu, low.
RICHFIELD URBAN VILLAGE
SITE, BUILDING AND PARKING DATA SUMMARY
November 12, 1998
A. EXISTING STRUCTURES
1. Richfield State Bank Building
Bank/ Office/ Retail/ McDonald's
2. Woodlake Medical Clinic
3. Existing 2 story Brick House @ Harriet & 67`s
4. Existing 1 Story Brick House- 6709 Lyndale
Total Gross
95,535 sf
22,190 sf
2,132 sf
1,478 sf
5. Single Family Structures between Grand/ Pleasant
To be removed.)
Total Existing 121,335 sf
B. PROPOSED NEW STRUCTURES
1. Office/Commercial Component
1 A. Program Total Gross Rentable Total Gross
Level One:
Retail/Restaurant 23,000 sf 32,775 sf
Level Two: Medical 25,000 sf 30,250 sf
Level Three: RSA Office 25,250 sf 27,045 sf
73,250 sf 90,070 sf
113. Conceptual Parking Required
Relocated 2-Story House 2,000 gsf @ 5/1000 gsf = 10
Renovated 6709 House 1,200 gsf @ 5 /1000 gsf = 6
Retail 8,000 gsf @ 4.5/1000 gsf = 36
Restaurant 15,000 gsf @ 8.3/1000 gsf = 125
Medical 25,000 gsf @ 5 /1000 gsf = 125
RSA Office 25,250 gsf @ 5/1000 gsf = 126
Total Parking Required 428
Approx. 250 seats with/stall per 3 seats
700 7W d Sheffer Sosah Afinncapohi, MN SS415 6121M -S508 Fax 6121JJ9 -5JS2
Minneapolis I Dallas I Phoenix
Richfield Urban Village Building and Parking Data Update Summary
October 14, 1998
Page 2
2. Assisted Living Component
2A. Program
78 Dwelling 973 gsf /unit
Total Area Floors 1 -3 75,967 gsf
2B. Conceptual Parking Required: 40 stalls
3. Multi- family Component
3A. Program
138 Dwelling Units: 6 Efficiencies
2 One Bedroom Townhomes
33 One Bedroom Flats
12 Two Bedroom Townhomes
65 Two Bedroom Flats
15 Three Bedroom Townhomes
5 Three Bedroom Flats
138 Total Units
Total Area Floors 1 -3 181,065 gsf
3B. Conceptual Parking Required
138 x 1.5 Dwelling Unit = 207
with reduction factor of .5/D.U.)
4. McDonalds Component
4A. Program 4,500 gsf t
4B. Conceptual Parking Required: 50 Stalls
S. Parking Ramp
5A. Program 196,200 gsf
1 % Levels down, access to commercial
garage level, 4 Levels up)
5B. Parking provided 597 stalls
MM/u*khfid/data 1014
Richfield Urban Village Building and Parking Data Update Summary
October 14, 1998
Page 3
C. PARKING SUMMARY
Required:
6701 — Relocated 2 -story brick 10
6709 — Renovated Professional w /replacement
Replacement 415
Office commercial 412
Assisted living 40
Multi - Family 207
Total Required
Parking Provided:
6701 Lyndale
6709 Lyndale
Ramp (4 up /1 1/2 down)
Below Office/Commercial
Below Assisted Living
Below Multi - Family
McDonalds
Bank on Grade
Multi - Family on Grade
Total Parking Provided
Status Area Totals:
Existing Bank Building
Existing Clinic Building
6701 Lyndale (2 story brick house)
6709 Lvndale
Subtotal- Existing Building Area
1084
Standard HC Total
19 1 20
5 1 6
557 40 597
106 3 109
50 2 52
161 4 165
58 2 60
26 1 27
28 1 29
1010 55 1065
95,535 gsf
22,190 gsf
2,132 gsf
1.478 gsf
121,335 gsf
Parking Ramp (4 up /1 1/2 down) NIC
Commercial/ Office/ Restaurant/ Retail 90,070 gsf
Assisted Living 75,967 gsf
Multi - Family 181,065 gsf
McDonalds 4.500 gsf
Subtotal- Proposed Building Area 351.602 gsf
Grand Total Area Eiristing + Proposed 472,937 gsf
Does not include grade parking or parking ramp areas)
MM/u /richfid/dau 1014
Richfield Urban Village Building and Parking Data Update Summary
October 14, 1998
Page 4
D. SITE DATA SUMMARY
Item Existing Proposed or FAR
Total Site Area sf 628,997 628,997
Building Coverage (sf) 189,991 30%
Total Bldg. Area sf) 121,335 472,937 0.75
Impervious Site Area 365,687 58%
460, 291 73%
Pervious Site Area (sf) 263,369 42%
168,766 27%
MWvJrichrwVdata1014
Rehder'-
Associates, Inc.
CIVIL ENGINEERS A LAND SURVEYORS
PRELIMINARY PROPERTY DESCRIPTION FOR BANK REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Lots 1, 2. 3 and 4, Block 1, RICHFIELD BANK ADDITION, according to the recorded plat
thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 1, J. N. HAUSER'S ADDITION, according to the
recorded plot thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. 8, 9 and 10. Block 1, LYNDALE SHORES ON WOOD LAKE,
according to the recorded plot thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Lots 23, 24 and 25. Block 4, LYNDALE SHORES ON WOOD LAKE, according to the recorded
plot thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
3440 Federal Drive, Suite 240 - Eagan, Minnesota 55122 - (612) 452 -5051 - FAX (612) 452.9797
EAW- Richfield Urban Village Project
b. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to be used for storage of
petroleum products or other materials (except water).
Proposed site usage are not of the type that typically require above or below ground storage of petroleum
products or other potentially hazardous materials in tanks. Any such tank that is necessary for a future
user, would have to be approved and permitted through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
and other jurisdictional agencies.
22. Traffic Parking spaces added 650- Existing spaces (ifproject involves expansion) 415- Estimated Total
Average Daily Traffic (AD7) generated 10.345 Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if
known) and its timing 1.170 PM . For each affected road indicate the AD and the directional
distribution of traffic with and without the project. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic
congestion on the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements which will be necessary.
The following traffic analysis was completed by BRW, Inc.
Trip Generation Summary
The traffic generation associated with the combination of current land uses is estimated at 820 PM peak
hour trips and 6,520 daily trips. The proposed redevelopment is expected to generate an additional 350
PM peak hour and 3,825 daily trips to the adjacent street network. Therefore, the total traffic generation
from the site, based on traffic generation rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, is
estimated at 1,170 PM peak hour and 10,345 daily trips.
Existine Traffic Volumes
Existing average daily traffic volumes on key roadways around the site are listed below:
Location
66th Street West of Lyndale Avenue
66th Street East of Lyndale Avenue
Lyndale Avenue North of 66th Street
Lyndale Avenue South of 68th Street
67th Street East of Lyndale Avenue
68th Street East of Lyndale Avenue
Existing Average Daily Traffic Volume
28,600 vehicles per day
19,200 vehicles per day
18,200 vehicles per day
12,800 vehicles per day
1,200 vehicles per day
1,150 vehicles per day
Existing PM peak hour turning movement volumes at the key intersections around the site are listed in
Table 1 (Appendix C and on Figure 5).
Directional Distribution
The expected directional orientation of site generated traffic was estimated based on the results of a
vehicle trace survey that was conducted and an analysis of general traffic patterns in the immediate area
around the site. The resulting directional distribution is listed below:
66th Street to the west -37%
66th Street to the east -20%
Lvndale Avenue to the north -20%
Lvndale Avenue to the south - 13%
68th Street to the east - 10%
WEXCK.FSI _ DRJ%MO8:T,01'A1CH- EAWDOCIWB -Imh Page 11 of 19 Revised Date 12/4/98
EAW- Richfield Urban Village Project
Forecast Post - Development Traffic Volumes
Forecast post - development traffic volumes were prepared by adding the expected site generated traffic to
existing traffic volumes in accordance with the estimated directional distribution. The forecast daily
traffic volumes are documented below and the forecast peak hour turning movement volumes in Table 2
Appendix C and on Figure 6).
Location
66th Street West of Lyndale Avenue
66th Street East of Lyndale Avenue
Lyndale Avenue North of 66th Street
Lyndale Avenue South of 68th Street
67th Street East of Lyndale Avenue
68th Street East of Lyndale Avenue
Traffic Operations Analysis
Forecast Post - Development Daily Traffic
33,500 vehicles per day (+4,900)
22,500 vehicles per day (+ 3,300)
20,800 vehicles per day ( +2,600)
14,900 vehicles per day (+2,100)
5,500 vehicles per day (+4,300)
1,750 vehicles per day (+ 600)
A traffic operations analysis of the key intersection s around the site was conducted for both the existing
and post - development conditions, using the appropriate procedures as outlined in the Highway Capacity
Manual. It should be noted that the City of Richfield has selected the boundary between Level of Service
LOS) D and E as the index of congestion for this project.
The results of this analysis are documented in Table 3 (Appendix C) and include the following:
Using existing traffic volumes, roadway geometry and intersection traffic control, all of the key
intersections currently provide LOS D or better operations.
Using post - development volumes and the existing roadway geometry and intersection traffic control,
all of the key intersections still provide LOS D or better operation.
As a result of this analysis, it can be concluded that the proposed project should not result in any unusual
levels of congestion at any of the key intersections around the site based on the overall level of
intersection operation. However, the traffic operations analysis did point out one minor issue. The
expected increase in left turning traffic, particularly on the south approach to the 66th Street/Lyndale
Avenue intersection, may result in queue lengths that exceed the available left turn storage during peak
traffic periods. Revising the left turn signal phasing could easily mitigate this condition by decreasing
the length of left turn stackage.
The traffic operations analysis indicates that traffic volumes along the segment of 68th Street, east of
Lyndale Avenue, are expected to increase by approximately 600 vehicleF per day (34 %). Three
important items should be noted:
I. This increase is limited to the segment of 68th Street between Lyndale Avenue and Pleasant Avenue
and is primarily due to the neighborhood's request to disconnect Grand and Pleasant Avenues from
67th Street.
2. This increase is not expected to result in any unusual levels of congestion along 68th Street and the
post- development volume (1,750 vehicles per day) is still within the City of Richfield's typical range
of volumes for residential streets.
3. The increase in volume is not the result of any additional through traffic being diverted through the
neighborhood. The results of a vehicle trace survey in the area indicated that there was very little
1A"' EVCK- FSI ',V0LIW_DR1VE`.0827,01'JUCH -EAW DOOLJB -Imh Page 12 of 19 Revised Date 12/4/98
EAW- Richfield Urban Village Project -
diversion of through traffic today (less than 1% of the traffic on 68th Street) and that the development
of the Urban Village project is not expected to change travel patterns in the area.
An actual parking capacity study is in process. Any potential forecasted parking increases would be
accommodated with a parking ramp structure within its current footprint. Traffic trip generation and
analysis is not dependent upon parking counts, but is determined based on building size and usage. There
would not be any further environmental impact resulting from this increase.
23. Vehicle - Related Air Emissions Provide an estimate of the effect of the project's traffic generation on
air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or mitigation
measures on air quality impacts. (If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult "EAW
Guidelines " about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.)
The following air quality analysis was prepared for the proposed project by BRW, Inc.:
The proposed project will generate air pollution as a result of motor vehicle activity generated by the
proposed land use development. Motor vehicles emit a variety of air pollutants including carbon
monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and particulates. The primary pollutant of concern is CO
for the following reasons:
CO is a tasteless, odorless gas that can cause health effects at relatively low concentrations for
relatively short exposure periods.
The Twin Cities metropolitan area is classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPA) as a moderate non - attainment area for CO.
CO is a byproduct of the combustion process. CO is emitted at higher rates by vehicles that are idling,
accelerating or decelerating than those that are cruising at constant speeds. CO is also emitted at higher
rates by vehicles traveling at lower speeds than those traveling at higher speeds. For these reasons, CO
concentrations are generally highest in the vicinity of signalized intersections where vehicles are delayed
and /or changing speeds, and thus emitting more CO.
Higher CO concentrations generally occur in close proximity to roadway vehicle sources. Generally,
concentrations approaching state air quality standards may be found within approximately 100 feet of a
roadway source. CO is dispersed in ambient air by wind and meteorological effects such that
concentrations fall off rapidly with increasing distance away from a given roadway.
The state ambient air quality standards for CO are 30 PPM (parts per million) on a one -hour average, and
9 PPM on an eight -hour average. These standards are set at levels to protect the most sensitive members
of the population and are not to be exceeded more than once per year.
The impacts of the proposed project on ambient air quality have been evaluated by computer modeling of
future traffic flow and vehicle emissions at intersections in the vicinity of the project to estimate CO
concentrations due to project - generated traffic. The air quality modeling methodology consists of the
following steps:
Traffic analvsis - the results of the traffic impact analysis (see Question #22) are used to
determine traffic volumes and intersection operational parameters including lane geometry,
signal and phase length.
Emissions estimates - The U.S. EPA MOBILE5a mobile source emissions model is used to
estimate CO emission rates for vehicles traveling at various speeds.
E CK•FS1 PaOLI:_DFUVE,O$7T.01'JUCH.EAW DOCIln -imh Pa-' 13 of 19 Revised Date 12/4/98
T ^
LO
TN, 0irisµ34JLt. X10
a
W. 64th Street
11 T1
24 '
w 3.;
Nr, N 114
T T „ 16J /
J T ."'
yyC
7g—' µ'
Vi ; r
r = y W. 65th
Street
126+
62 (
DLn LO
99 N -4-724 co M E— 627 +--
732 4j i^ , 27 E1{ 101 ,
17
i 1JJ 66th Streeta! !
a 235' ' 196 ' 1262—+
rr
Y 1159' . o ao
1090 —
rt, cD 0) t-- 32 -;;p N
ri 242 o cD 57 h, (
D
U-) a_« (
v
µG
FT
T 52 NT 31 ''°'°
a'r ., W.
67th
Street
29
N (pD (
Di.
Lo cli t
corn a6 274 *gq
T
l() 4
39 011; 1=11 L5 ra YY r6U4h-
trees t Kw
O
co BRW
Figure 5 All I N N E 5 0 T A 1998 Existing PM
Peak Hour Turning
Movement Volumes Nor ro S-1. NOfrM SOUf C(:
Mr
y
17
1-41t
24-x,
r,v ;
N N 144Mr r.
167
ink` -. ay
W. 64th Street
W. 65th Street
792
17
1336 -1, ,-J,
35 -;q ,
W. 67th 5treet
LO 39
500r
41 `f jSteet
rn Co
4 3
Figure 6
RichWd Lake • • • Village, Richfield Urban Village
R I C H F, E l D, M N N E S o TA Post Development PM Peak Hour
BRW
I? Turning Movement Volumes
n. . .. w.n N., ie S-1. N0170 SOUOCF: BOW. INC.
126
62 , 7 co CIO
0
r' 42
N 731
N ° ''' L 56
I
no VE—
E1 I y ... # 27 E1 118
F W 66th Stree
35 41t- 196
122
22
242 (0
1109... #' 01 C\j
10 N 01 (
323
t ca
0 1 C'j
co 29 , ' rnv
y -
to
N co
co u-,
d
3
L
i
VF•:9
7'4
274 -.- r
W. 64th Street
W. 65th Street
792
17
1336 -1, ,-J,
35 -;q ,
W. 67th 5treet
LO 39
500r
41 `f jSteet
rn Co
4 3
Figure 6
RichWd Lake • • • Village, Richfield Urban Village
R I C H F, E l D, M N N E S o TA Post Development PM Peak Hour
BRW
I? Turning Movement Volumes
n. . .. w.n N., ie S-1. N0170 SOUOCF: BOW. INC.
3
M en r N N
N
C%
QOQM
N
r
O N
N vF1
cN
1 N a N N
OHO Q N N co% 00
IC
N C% Q
V'f C— V1 V'f n 00
N co
C14 L- Y1
C
c
C
G
CIA
C
r
err
C C1
CF
1 0000 N
i.
r
117
AV
S
00 C4
ry C4
SKY
t
W
AA L:l
Con a e C a2
le Z Z Z Z rLvWs Z
24 Ur' a o o
3
r l en P N n
a
N
N O en
CM
N e l N N N
e•f t If p C-4
m
N N
Lair 00
N
0a0 n
C
a
Tth Na ho Q
r t th h
Q oD N i
en
e+ni
r
0
n C i rn
C4
i
N n
r.
r
to
4Q troll 70
r
N n
N
0n0 ohe
r
r
Ul 4
v w
Cj x
VJ
C V r-I V LLl LU
ixa
cu x r
Z'
r N x
J: L=
F-
S/1 J]
v
C JJ C
F N
Ld r iii q' Y z z J' Pp 17
rMOO C, w00 Z C:.i
l 1'+ 1-4
f
i
C
y
J
i.
J
v
J
M O
v j
r V
U
r-
U
M
a
3
x
o
c <
c
CA
N
N
x
z
LW
I
Z'
Q
vi
z
X, a
n
N
0 a c.
Z
U
J
ZyQ
J R
I
I
D
N
X
Z
a
L
Z s
c
0
m
z
a T
ovi
c
i
I
I
N
a
3
ac
C
a
c.: C
Q
x
J
r.
ce
ti
z
P
3
s