2. SR 09-28-2009Item # 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Focused Area Study Participants
FROM: Jeremy Barnhart, Planning Manager
DATE: September 24, 2009
SUBJECT: Focused Area Study Phase II, Meeting #I
The first Focused Area Study Phase II meeting is scheduled for Monday, September 28th at
7:00 pm at the Elk River City Hall.
This meeting is intended to confirm everyone's understanding on a couple of key issues,
including:
Scope (~1hat issue, problem, concern, question are we solving for? ~Xlhat is the goal
of the plan? To provide a framework to reinvent the area, to maximize potential of
the area, to maintain the current levels of commercial and industrial activity?) It's
important that all participants agree on what the plan is intended to do.
• Core Assumptions (~Xlhat, if any, assumptions can we work from?) Can we all
agree that the commuter rail station will increase interest in this area? Can we agree
that MnDOT will change accesses along Highway 10 at some point in the future, and
these changes will impact area traffic patterns and businesses?
Planning Horizon (How far out should this plan look? 15 years, 20, 30?) People
generally put the plan into "now" terms, regardless of the planning horizon. ~Ie saw
this with Phase 1 of the plan, when businesses had concerns with activities that
would transpire 30 years from now affecting their business today. Too long a
horizon places a heavy emphasis on assumptions, reducing clarity. Too short a time
frame may not allow for enough time to make some of the changes, especially
market driven changes.
• Boundaries (The planning area is bounded by Hwy 10 on the east and the river on
the west. ~1hat is the north and south boundary?) It is assumed that the north
boundary is the 101 / 10/ 169 interchange. The southern boundary is around 165th
while these may seem like innocent questions, it is expected that they will generate
significant discussion. To facilitate that discussion, Hoisington Koegler Group has prepared
a number of scenarios, all related to the changed imposed by MnDOT, related to an
interchange. These are outlined on the attached memo from HKGi.
Staff has been working on gaining a better understanding of MnDOT's plans: short and long
term plans for Hwy 10; however, has been unable to setup the meeting. Once this
information is acquired staff will forward it to the group.
Lastly, increased public participation is expected. Based on Council and EDA direction,
greater emphasis has been placed on communicating with the public. while the website and
a periodic newsletter will continue to be used, staff has invited the public to provide their
email address. It is hoped that more frequent and efficient information dispersal to the
public will prevent the misinformation that was prevalent in Phase I.
Atta~hmP~tc
Memo dated September 24, 2009 from Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
Composite Master Plan Map
Elk River FAST Phase II Proposed work Plan
Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
MEMO
September 24, 2009
To: Jeremy Barnhart, Planning Manager
From: Bruce Chamberlain, ASLA
Project Planner
Re: FAST study -phase 2: questions to ponder prior to EDA/CC/PC work session.
In preparation for the EDA/CC/PC work session on Monday, there are a couple of core questions for the
group to ponder. Discussion of these questions will be a significant topic on Monday.
1. What should be the boundary of the expanded study area? The primary question is how far south
- to the Kelley Farm, to the extent of existing development or somewhere in between.
2. What should we assume to be our planning horizon (we could look out 15 years to 50 years)?
3. MN/DOT has stated that their desire to upgrade Highway 10 to alimited-access freeway has an
unknown timeframe.
• Should the FAST study establish land use scenarios to accommodate an eventual
interchange (the way phase 1 was done)?
Or, should we assume a possible interchange will be beyond our planning horizon and we
should study land use scenarios for at-grade intersections?
To help you think about this issue, we have framed some scenarios that we think are possibilities.
Scenario 1
Let's say we complete the FAST study assuming no interchange (overpass/underpass) within our
planning horizon and that (no interchange) becomes the reality.
171 St will remain a signalized intersection.
• 165th intersection may shift in its location but an intersection will remain in its vicinity and that
intersection remains un-signalized until some point in the future.
• The 171 st/Highway 10 intersection remains the primary access into the study area.
New development will orient around 171st and the rail station.
~ At some point in the future,165th will warrant a signal and new development will begin to orient
around it.
• An interchange may still come to pass but it is expected to happen so far out that planning for it
today leaves the development picture too much in limbo.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659
Ph (612) 338-0800 Fx (612) 338-6838
Elk River FAST phase 2 -kick-off EDA/CC/PC work session preparation
September 24, 2009
Page 2 of 2
Scenario 2
Let's say we complete the FAST study assuming no interchange (overpass/underpass) access into our
study area but pressure for an interchange happens sooner than expected.
• 171 St will remain a signalized intersection in the near-term.
• 165th intersection may shift in its location but an intersection will remain in its vicinity and that
intersection becomes signalized in the near-term.
• Development and redevelopment reliant on access and visibility from those intersections will
happen over time.
• Properties to the south of 165th may remain undeveloped.
~ MNIDOT determines that they need to implement their long-term plan to build an interchange
somewhere in this reach of Highway 10 and close all other at-grade intersections.
• MN/DOT determines an interchange south of 165th is the only viable option due to conflicts with
existing development.
Or, existing developed lands within FAST are purchased to build the interchange.
Scenario 3
Let's say we accept the eventuality of an interchange and we convince MN/DOT that 171st (or very
close to it) is the right place to locate it.
• The properties currently located directly at the intersection as well as some others will need to be
acquired over time to prepare for the interchange.
~ Once the interchange is built, new development will populate the area around the interchange.
Scenario 3
This is the scenario used in the FAST phase 1 study. Let's say we accept the inevitability of an
interchange and we believe the location suggested in the first phase of FAST is the right location.
• The 165th and 167th intersections are closed and a new signalized intersection is opened at the
future interchange location.
• The suggested interchange location has relatively minor impact on existing development and
relatively close access to the rail station and existing development at 171st
New local street connections to the intersection are completed to provide access on both sides of
Highway 10.
New development can orient around the new intersection but also accommodateltake advantage
of the eventual interchange.
I look forward to the discussion on Monday. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
M.' IELK RIVER108-65 Focus Area Study(FAST)13 Meetings) memo EDA work session 9-24-09.DOC
Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
Elk River FAST Phase II
Proposed Work Plan
Task 1-Project Re-initiation (September)
This phase will be used to establish a critically important baseline from which to launch phase II
of the FAST study. Here, we will review with City staff and elected/appointed officials where the
first phase of work left off as well as the comments received in later public meetings. We will use
this information to help the community re-evaluate core project assumptions (especially
pertaining to Highway 10 access) that will establish a foundation for planning.
l .l Participate in meeting with MN/DOT officials to review their plans and objectives for
Highway 10 access and long-term reconstruction.
1.2 Conduct kick-off meeting with City Staff to review the work plan and schedule, gather
missing base information, review phase I outcomes and comments and identify alternative
approaches to Highway 10 access.
1.3 9/29/09 Facilitate EDA/CC/PC workshop to review phase Ioutcomes/public comments,
determine if there are modifications needed to phase I, determine agreed-upon project
assumptions, especially pertaining to the future of Highway 10 access.
1.4 Based on the outcome of the workshop, prepare technical memo stating determined project
assumptions/objectives.
1.5 Update project website with latest information.
Deliverables:
^ MN/DOT meeting summary
^ Project assumptionslobjectives technica/memo
^ Project schedule & refined work plan
Task 2-Conduct Project Area Analysis (SeptemberlOctober)
2.1 Prepare expanded-area base mapping to encompass FAST phase I and II study area.
2.2 Early/mid October. Conduct up to 6 individual and confidential stakeholder meetings with
area property and business owners to review the project assumptionslobjectives and
determine their future property interests.
2.3 Prepare study area analysis diagrams that build from those prepared for phase I of the
project.
2.4 Facilitate meeting with City staff to review gathered information and materials.
2.5 Update project website.
2.6 Prepare project newsletter for distribution by City staff.
Deliverables:
^ Analysis diagrams
^ Existing conditions technical memo
^ Project newsletter
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659
Ph (612) 338-0800 Fx (612) 338-6838
Work Plan -FAST Phase II, Elk River, MN
August 12, 2009
Page2of3
Task 3-Explore the Possibilities (October/November)
3.1 Facilitate visioning roundtable with City staff at HKGi office to build from phase I work
and identify the parameters and possibilities for the full project area. Focus will be on
developing a series of approaches to redevelopment, circulation, recreation, and open
space. This could include re-exploration of certain aspects of the phase I plan.
3.2 Prepare illustrative concept diagrams for the approaches explored in 3.1. The concepts will
each provide a unique approach to achieving overall project objectives. The concepts will
illustrate:
• Development patterns: HKGi will refine the alternative land use concepts to depict
the land uses proposed with each concept.
• Transportation systems: Each concept will include a depiction of all proposed
transportation infrastructure including roadways, trails, and sidewalks.
• Green infrastructure: Each concept will include a depiction of proposed parks,
natural open spaces and greenway links.
3.3 Quantify development "yield" for each concept that identifies the yield of commercial
space and households and forecasts jobs, population and development value. This task will
identify the magnitude of development potential for each concept alternative as a way to
compare and contrast them.
3.4 Facilitate review session with City staff at HKGi office to evaluate concepts.
3.5 Revise concepts based on meeting feedback.
3.6 11 /23/09 Facilitate concept review session with EDA/PC/CC for review and feedback.
3.7 Revise concepts based on meeting feedback.
3.8 Update project website and prepare project newsletter illustrating concept alternatives.
3.9 Facilitate public open house to provide an opportunity for the community to offer feedback
on the concepts prior to refinement into a single alternative.
3.10 Prepare summary of community feedback.
Deliverables:
^ Meeting and open house agendas/summaries
^ Preliminary concepts
^ Development yield technical memo
^ Project newsletter
Task 4-Prepare Preferred Plan for the Full FAST Study Area (December -February)
4.1 Conduct meeting with City staff to review public input and identify recommendation for
refining concepts into a single, preferred plan.
4.2 Facilitate EDA/PC/CC work session to review public input and recommendations for plan
refinement.
4.3 Based on EDA/PC/CC input, prepare a preferred plan for the full study area. Like the
concept alternatives, the preferred plan will be designed and graphically illustrated around:
• Development patterns
• Transportation systems
• Green infrastructure
4.4 Update development "yield" for the preferred plan.
4.5 Assist City staff in preparing a utility and infrastructure impact analysis for the preferred
plan.
4.6 Prepare draft report that incorporates both FAST phases I & II.
4.7 Facilitate review session with City staff.
Work Plan -FAST Phase II, Elk River, MN
August 12, 2009
Page3of3
4.8 Facilitate final review workshop with EDA/PC/CC to present the full draft plan for
comment and recommendation for approval.
4.9 Refine draft plan based on feedback and submit a final plan.
4.10 Present plan to City Council for comment and approval.
4.11 Make final modifications as necessary.
Deliverables:
^ Preferred plan and support graphics for full study area
^ 3 bound report copies and CD of report at draft and final stages
^ CAD version of master plan
^ Meeting agendas/summaries