Loading...
01-23-2012 DT MINDowntown Task Force ~t.~sc Dw~d!t Minutes January 23, 2012 Downtown Taskforce Meeting, January 23, 2012 After discussion, Stewart Wilson and Dana Anderson nominated as co-chairman's. The draft minutes of the November minutes approved as written. proceeded to do the small group task of coming_up with a problem statement. "Why axe we doing as nl_~n??" Fred, Mike, Jean, Mally, and Keith Immense change with Hwy 10 A plan is good...it allows us to see what we axe getting fox people to invest. Dana, Nick, Jerry, and Pat Discussed why and what the task force did in 2006 Now we know a Hwy 10 layout How to draw people & business into Downtown Showcase the brand/city -strong natural element is the river Cbad, Lance, Stewart, and Jim Hudson The city has worked many years on many plans but why have they not been implemented. It is appropriate? Does Downtown need revitalization? Each group posted their ideas on the board and discussion followed: Question: What is downtown? Historically downtown is where people gathered as a community. Close to the river. The context series do this now. N:ADepa~tmcn[sVCommunity DcvdopmrnCAYlanning\P~ojcc[s\Downrown Ylan 2011\b(in~[es 1-33.docx It defines "us", our culture Should it (the plan) be looked at as the "Greater Downtown" area? Plan is good fox the future, it shows what might/could be to future stakeholders. Proceeded again in the small eroups to fine tune a problem statement. Break Looked at the three revised statements. What makes it workable? Accepted by majority Broke into steps In needs to function-guidance Three small group Problem Statements: • We are doing this plan to reestablish the small neighborhood spirit characterized by small business and single family residences. • A workable plan to draw current/future citizens to Elk River's greater downtown area and to guide current and future property/business development. • To provide business/property owners and investors in our community a workable plan which will improve and protect our culture being anchored to rivexfront experience and will accommodate change to highway 10 and encourage reinvestment both in buildings and businesses to draw people. After discussion, the fmal combined Problem Statement: We are doing this plan to pro~ride guidance and vision of the future of greater downtown Elk River due to immense anticipated changes brought on by Highway 10 and market forces. Items for additional discussion...collectively decide where this topic falls The taskfoxce members were asked to generate a list of topics that they felt warranted further discussion of information. As a way to prioritize those topics, members were given three dots and were asked to place them next to the three items they felt critical to the completion of the plan. The breakdown: (6) Preserve older housing stock. Are we doing that? (6) Kevitali~ing the core downtown area (details to be determined). (5) The `izver trial': Is this a part of the plan? (S) Presewe historic buildings (implementation priorities to include identification, programs, resources available to property owners). (3) Careful review of the alignment of streets north of 10. (3) Strategic infrastructure needed by the dty- Kivers Edge Commons Park (2) Clarity on Hwy 10 for access from the Hwy and access on city streets to downtown. (2) Bluff Block along Main S~-the cumnt new building and history and the established business and history. (1) Jackson Ave changing land use to `medium density"on the East side. (1) Future transit or train station locations. (1) Study area houndary, does it need to be condensed. (1) Planning horition. Currently 20years. Should it be longer, shorter? (1) Historic Preservation. (1) Miared uses, a general evaluation of appropriate land uses. (1) Better understand issues with e~zsting newprojects, so that appropriate changes to ourplan can be made to reduce that risk. Items not receiving a vote: Schedule (Is the length suggested by the draft schedule appropriate?) Process. How do we incorporate community input? The building demolition on Maiu St. next to the EA Meats and the EA Meats area. The f ture study area Study ama boundary, does it need to be expanded? Jackson Avenue alignment, and its intersection with Highway 10. Commercial uses along and south of Main, should there be a d~ned edge of downtown? Proa^imity of residential to the rerouted railroad. General discussion occurred Keep current single family housing intact Where does downtown end? Do we prevent growth to save one house? It was questioned what houses would be removed with the current plan, not many? Why did the city do a Highway plan? Do convey what most likely will happen in the future to then plan around. The top three critical areas were discussed 7. 1-Pouring Stack: Minimize the impact and preserve housing stock as a priority 2. Kevitalitiation: What extend do we preserve? Do we prevent growth to save one house? Can we xe~ritalize downtown without Highway 10 changes? Fill empth spaces What is the "critical mass" to support downtown? Proposed Highway 10 design provides better connectivity of the north and south side of the highway and tracks. 3. BiverTrail.• A river trail should be shown on the plan as a broad concept/ search area and let the city administration pursue conversations with the affected property owners/ Bailey Point (possible future park) plays a large role in this decision Issues: trespassing, waltjing through yards to get to the trail, Safety issues with trail heads, parking on streets, The next steps were discussed and what the next meeting will involve the remainder of the items. Minutes xepared by Jeremy Barnhart. ~^ n / (Stewart Wil on, Ch G~~ Tina Allard, City Clerk