Loading...
08-13-2007 DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE MEMORANDUM TO: Redevelopment Framework Task Force CC: Mayor and City Council FROM: Catherine Mehelich, Director of Economic Development DATE: August 13, 2007 SUBJECT: Next Steps Attachments ● Redevelopment Framework Timeline, draft as of August 10, 2007 Next Steps As a point of information, the attached timeline provides an outline of the Task Force’s redevelopment planning meetings to date, as well as anticipated dates for upcoming Task Force, City Board and Commission meetings and Community Open Houses. The Task Force should note that there is no Task Force meeting proposed for September since the draft Plan is under review and comment during the next month. In addition, please note that the October Task Force meeting is scheduled for the third Monday of the month in order to provide staff sufficient time to collate and prepare the summary of public comments for Task Force review. The meeting dates will be posted on the City website as dates are confirmed for the various City Boards and Commissions, Community Open Houses and Task Force meetings. MEMORANDUM TO: Redevelopment Framework Task Force CC: Mayor and City Council FROM: Scott Clark, Community Development Director DATE: August 13, 2007 SUBJECT: Highway 10 Discussion Attachments  Revised Pages 30, 31 and 33 of Draft Plan  Elevated Roadway Image  Depressed Roadway Image  “As-Is” Roadway Image Issue Based on direction from the City Council (see attached minutes dated July 9, 2007) the Task Force was asked to reconsider their initial recommendation of eliminating the Main Street crossing at Highway 10 on the Illustrative Master Plan. Also attached are the minutes from the Task Force’s meeting of March 5, 2007 where the subject of Highway 10 was originally discussed. From a recommendation standpoint there appears to be four design options: 1) Keep Jackson Avenue and Main Street “as is” (on-grade). Attachment I. 2) Eliminate one of the aforementioned streets per the original recommendation. 3) Elevate the roadway as shown on Attachment II. 4) Depress the roadway as show on Attachment III. As described on the attached “Roadway Design Option “(from page 31 of the first approved Draft Plan each option carries with it a series of advantages and disadvantages. Part of the reason for these difficulties is the need for balancing the needs and objectives of MnDot versus the City’s wants, and secondly, design options are limited due to the edge of the existing core downtown buildings on the south and the railroad line to the north. It should also be remembered that in the Task Force’s discussions three other over- riding principles were addressed: 1) Visibility and a direct access to the greater downtown area is critical to long term economic health 2) Determining an agreed upon City/MnDOT Highway 10 layout is critical in order to prevent redevelopment projects being built and creating expensive acquisition issues in the future, even if that future is 20 years out. 3) A geometric study is critical to determine not only a future Highway 10 layout but also the interior roadway layouts that support a redesign, Recommendation In order to move the Draft Redevelopment Plan forward for Board and Commission review and public open houses, staff recommends the following: 1) The Illustrative Master Plan should show Jackson Ave. and Main Street being at grade (this would represent the idea that it is a placeholder, albeit the text of the Plan will strongly argue for a geometric study). 2) The text of the Plan will contain plan illustrations that represent the various options that had been considered. 3) The matrix found on the original Draft (page 31) will be modified as shown on the “Roadway Design Option” attachment. 4) The Plan’s Highway 10 conclusion is that a geometric study is critical to avoid any new redevelopment efforts causing conflict with future design and construction. C:\\Users\\kporath\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\8.13.07 hwy 10_336879\\8.13.07 hwy 10.doc MEMORANDUM TO: Redevelopment Framework Task Force CC: Mayor & City Council FROM: Catherine Mehelich, Director of Economic Development DATE: August 13, 2007 SUBJECT: Consider River Trail Concept Attachments  Draft Modified River Trail Concept for Discussion Purposes, dated August 13, 2007 Issue The Task Force is asked, upon request by a several residents of the Morton/Norfolk Avenues area, to consider removing the river trail that is currently depicted in the Draft Redevelopment Framework Plan and Draft Illustrative Land Use Plan. A spokesperson from the Morton/Norfolk Avenues neighborhood has been asked to make a brief statement on behalf of the neighborhood regarding their concerns and request. Following their statement staff recommends that Task Force discuss and take action on the following questions: Options for Discussion In a normal redevelopment planning process, the public participation phase would allow for the entire community, including stakeholders, City Boards and Commissions, and the rest of the community to review and provide comments on the Task Force’s accepted Draft Plan. All of the input would be collected over a period of approximately two months and then provided to the Task Force in its entirety for review and consideration as opposed to reacting with modifications to the Plan while it is under the review phase. The first question for the Task Force to consider is: 1) Does the Task Force wish to make revisions to its Draft Plan now, or allow the process to proceed in order to allow the rest of the community an opportunity to provide comments prior to modifying the Plan? Consider River Trail Concept August 13, 2007 Task Force Meeting Page 2 of 2 If the answer to the first question is yes, then staff recommends the Task Force consider selecting one of the following options for dealing with the river trail concept within the Draft Plan prior to its proceeding for public review and comment: 1) Eliminate the entire future river trail in its entirety from the Draft Plan, illustrations and narrative. 2) Eliminate the entire future river trail from the Draft Illustrative Land Use Plan, and related plan illustrations, but leave references to the desire for a future river trail within the Plan narrative. 3) Modify a portion of the future river trail concept within the Draft Plan to extend from River’s Edge Commons Park westerly to Lowell Avenue (with the understanding that the concept would be implemented in conjunction with a future redevelopment proposal), up to Main Street and continue its connection easterly to Babcock Park (this would explicitly eliminate the river trail from Lowell Ave west from the Draft Plan). A draft illustrative land use plan indicating this concept is attached for discussion. 4) Leave the future river trail concept “as is” within the Draft Plan. MEMORANDUM TO: Redevelopment Framework Task Force CC: Mayor and City Council FROM: Heidi Steinmetz, Assistant Director of Economic Development DATE: August 13, 2007 SUBJECT: Summary Report of Stakeholder Meetings Attachments ● July 24 Property Owner meeting notes Written public comments as of August 7, 2007 Article to appear in the September/October issue of the City Newsletter (The Current) Purpose The purpose of this memo is to provide a summary report on the public comments received thus far from property owners located in the study area. The stakeholders meetings are the first in a series of opportunities for gathering public comment on the draft plan. The process provides for all of the public comment to be collected through the end of September/early October, which will be provided to the Task Force in October for review and consideration for refinements to the plan. It is recommended that the Task Force not take action until additional feedback is reviewed and received in October. Stakeholder Meetings Attached are the meeting notes from the property owner (stakeholders) meetings held on July 24. The main portion of both meetings was the question and answer session. Property owners who spoke at the meetings are listed on the notes. Approximately 130 people attended each meeting, verbalizing the main issue of concern to be the walking path/trail along the Mississippi River/Elk Rivers. Summary Report of Stakeholders Meetings Page 2 of 3 Summary Report Methodology This summary report is based on the 45 “parties” who provided written comments. “Parties” is defined by the following:  A married couple who submitted comments together  An organization who submitted joint comments, i.e. churches, associations, banks, etc.  A person or married couple who submitted a set of comments, i.e. sent both an e-mail and a comment form In other words, this summary is not based on the amount of submittals; it is based on the amount of “parties” who submitted written comments. Not included in this summary is the following:  Verbal comments  Inconclusive questions  Seven anonymous written comments and/or questions submitted at the property owner meetings Written comments were received by staff via the following means:  E-mails sent directly to staff  E-mails forwarded to staff by Councilmembers  Comment forms submitted at or after the property owner meetings  Written comments and/or questions submitted at property owner meetings  1 fax The comments received were not easily quantified; rather the comments are more qualitative in nature, so it is important that the Task Force read the comments. For instance, the two main issues of concern (the proposal trail and the addition of high density housing) do not represent the majority of those parties who submitted written comments. Those opposed to the trail represent 1/3 of the comments received and those opposed to high density housing represent just over ¼ of the comments received. Summary Report Main Issues of Concern  15 parties are concerned about the safety/privacy of the proposed trail.  11 parties are concerned about the addition of high density housing (7 of which specified the area adjacent to Lions Park and 4 parties are concerned with adding high density housing in general).  6 parties are concerned about utilizing Jackson Ave. as the main access into downtown.  6 parties expressed general parking concerns.  6 parties are disappointed with the public input process thus far.  5 parties are concerned about general traffic issues. Summary Report of Stakeholders Meetings Page 3 of 3  4 parties suggested that a Highway 10 study be completed prior to finalizing the plan.  5 parties provided comments regarding historic preservation (1 party specified preserving “parts of” the community and another expressed concern over the potential financial issues that designating historic properties may put on property owners).  3 parties have concerns about how the plan will affect taxes and property values.  3 parties disagree with the use of Eminent Domain.  3 parties expressed concerned about the Church of St. Andrew’s access.  3 parties disagree with the reconfiguration of Main Street. Positive Feedback  5 parties like the draft plan.  4 parties like the idea of the trail.  3 parties suggested utilizing Babcock Park.  2 parties are in favor of maintaining what is currently zoned as residential along Main Street rather than allowing any future rezoning to commercial. Next Steps The Task Force is asked to consider the attached public comments in addition to comments provided to the Task Force by other City Boards/Commission and the general public as the plan is refined this fall. On a public communications note, answers to frequently asked questions will appear in a Q & A newsletter to be distributed in the Star News later this month. In addition, the meetings were summarized in the attached article for the general public to appear in the September/October issue of the city newsletter, The Current, also distributed in the Star News. The Website continues to be updated frequently.