Loading...
PL 11/08/1989 - 30712/-1 CITY OF FRIDLEY PLAN1eTING COMMIBBION MEETINC�, NOVEMHER 8, 1989 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Betzold called the November 8, 1989, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Don Betzold, Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba, Sue Sherek, Alex Barna, Paul Dahlberg Members Absent: None Others Present: Jock Robertson, Community Development Director Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 25. 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: � MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to approve the October 25, 1989, Planning Commission minutes as written. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BBTZOLD DECLARED T8E MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. l. CONSIDERATION OF LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT STATION LOCATIONS: Mr. Robertson stated that at an earlier meeting he had asked the Commission to reconsider some of their earlier recommendations because of new data on the park and ride lots. He was concerned about what it might do to traffic volumes on the intersections. The Commission wanted more data and gave staff some policy directions and questions. He stated he has received answers to those questions. Mr. Robertson stated the park and ride location at University/ Mississippi will not, in the independent judgement of both an in- house traffic engineer and the BRW traffic engineers, significantly load up the University/Mississippi intersection. This is partly because the park and ride station is in the most advantageous location at the 10,000 Auto Parts site. They would not necessarily need all the 300 spaces even on an expanded 10,000 Auto Part site. Some spaces could be located in the Holly Shopping Center and in the southwest quadrant. People coming from the west side of �� � PLANNING CONIl�II88ION MEETING, NOVEMBTsR 8, 1989 PAGE 2 University might choose to park at Holly, so they do not have to cross University to park. Mr . Robertson stated the other concern he had was capturing the retail sales. The BRW economic consultants say that, although that might happen, they do not think that is a significant consideration. About the possible impact on 73rd Avenue, even if they take the worst case and say there were 500 spaces at Columbia Arena and all the cars went down 73'rd Avenue, that amounts to less than a 10% increase in the traffic already projected for 71st Avenue. Mr. Robertson stated staff is recommending that the City consider a combination commercial development and park and ride station at an expanded 10,000 Auto Parts site as its first priority in terms of serving the Center City area. There is also an advantage in that it is located most effectively for feeder bus traffic, because of the access to East River Road under the railroad tracks on Mississippi Street. Mr. Robertson stated staff is recommending the Planning Commission consider the Mississippi Street location as its first choice for a park and ride, understanding that it may have to be expanded and the Planning Commission consider Columbia Arena as a back-up park �"� and ride site if they get a lot more usage over time than they can accommodate on the Mississippi/ University Avenue site. Mr. Robertson stated he has briefed Mayor Nee and HRA Chairperson Larry Commers on Monday. They agreed with the Planning Commission that to have exclusive park and ride at the 10,000 Auto Parts site was a terrible waste of valuable property. It should only be considered as a multi-use site; in other words, a transit station, park and ride, plus some retail or office activity. They suggested that the HRA look at expanding the 10, 000 Auto Parts site along Mississippi Street which will improve the access, move the driveways further away from the intersection, and try to get more multi-use on the site. He stated he has been authorized to make an offer on the house that is for sale next to 10,000 Auto Parts. Mr. Dahlberg stated it would be more desirable, particularly from the standpoint of traffic, if they could expand the 10,000 Auto Parts site all the way to 5th Street. Mr. Barna stated the best thing would be to plan the park and ride at Mississippi but not pass up the ability to designate the Columbia Arena parking lot as an alternate park and ride. At Columbia Arena there would be no need for any property acquisition or changes. ^ Mr. Robertson stated he has asked the BRW consultants to bring to the next meeting the feeder bus route preliminary plans for both Mississippi Street and Columbia Arena. PLANNING COMMI86ION MEETINa, NOVEMBER 8, 1989 PAGE 3 ,� Mr. Dahlberg stated that in his memo, Mr. Robertson had indicated that one of the key concerns is the issue of pedestrian traffic across University Avenue if there are designated parking spaces at either at Holly Center or somewhere in the southwest quadrant. Mr. Dahlberg stated he was not sure if he concurred that signal timing would solve that problem. What other options might be available and how can the City explore funding of those options? One option is a pedestrian bridge over University Avenue. Mr. Robertson stated that when he and Ms. Dacy met with the BRW people the previous Friday, they brought up the possibility of a pedestrian bridge. Mr. Dahlberg stated if the City says that if there is a station located at Mississippi/University, there has to be a bridge across University Avenue, can a bridge be included in BRW's construction costs and budgeting? Mr. Robertson stated he did not know the answer to that question. He stated there is the handicapped access problem which makes it even more expensive, because there has to be a ramp or elevator at each end. !'� Mr. Dahlberg stated it would make sense that a bridge be located north at 66th Avenue, so there is enough distance for the ramp on each side. Ms. Slierek stated there is also the safety factor of children crossing University Avenue on their bicycles. Ms. Dacy stated the biggest concern with a bridge is, obviously, the cost. With the elevator, they quoted a cost of $900,000. Ms . Dacy stated the other concern is that obviously they do not have the background of the use of pedestrian bridges for LRT stations. BRW is also basing their concern on the use of pedestrian bridges in general. A bridge certainly deserves further study. There are other areas along the corridor that will not have the capacity for parking on the same side of the street as the LRT station, so the crossover issue will come up. Ms. Sherek stated if they balance the cost of using the existing parking in Holly Center for a portion of the LRT parking, using the land makes the bridge less costly. A bridge would also provide another enhancement for this particular intersection for all purposes, not just LRT. Mr. Kondrick stated he was not so sure merchants at Holly Shopping � Center are going to be interested in having cars in their parking lot to use the LRT station. Until the 10,000 Auto Parts site can PLANNIN(3 COMMI88ION MEETINa, NOVEMBER 8, 1989 PAGE 4 � be enlarged to handle all the parking spaces on that site, he was not in favor of a bridge. Mr. Saba disagreed. He stated he thought a bridge is a necessity at this intersection, not only for the convenience factor, but also for the safety factor. He would like to see the bridge whether or not all the parking is handled on the 10,000 Auto Parts site. It will add a safety factor for children crossing the LRT tracks. Mr. Kondrick stated a bridge is a novelty thing. He did not think seniors or children are going to walk up a long ramp, across the street, and then walk down the long ramp. Mr. Dahlberg stated there was nothing that said the bridge could not be on the south side of the University/Mississippi intersection and incorporate it into the southwest quadrant development, tie it into the Center City Plaza area in some way. The biggest difficulty is dealing with the Fire Station. Mr. Dahlberg asked what was the anticipated number of parking spaces required off the site on the west side if the LRT station is located here? Mr. Robertson stated he did not know. He did know a minority would ^ be on the Holly Center side. He would estimate 50-100 parking spaces. Mr. Dahlberg stated that even at the busiest time for Holly Center, all the parking spaces on the northeast end of the site are always empty. LRT parking would be a good use for that parking area. Mr. Robertson stated the parking spaces in the southeast corner, just south of Snyders, are used little also. Mr. Dahlberg stated he would like staff to express the Planning Commission's concern and desire to have a pedestrian bridge be seriously considered at the University/Mississippi intersection. Mr. Saba stated he had two major concerns for this intersection. One is safety, especially with children. The other one is it is a terrible waste of space for just an LRT station that may or may not go in. Mr. Dahlberg stated if the HRA does acquire additional land to double the size of the 10,000 Auto Parts site, that becomes a pretty significant parcel. Does it make sense to make that a parking lot for small retail/office versus a pretty good sized office building project? ^ Mr. Saba stated the City might not get the development they want on this property if the property is up for 5-8 years waiting for a possible LRT. r"'� ^ PLANNING COMMI88ION MLETIN�3. NOVEMBER 8, 1989 PAGE 5 Mr. Robertson stated he agreed, and that is why Mayor Nee and HRA Chairperson Commers are asking staff to proceed with redevelopment to see if they can keep the following options open (listed in order of priority): 1. the rail line 2. the station 3. the parking Mr. Dahlberg stated he thought the Planning Commission has pretty much agreed that there should be a station at the University/ Mississippi intersection, whether it is a park or ride or a"kiss and ride", etc. Mr. Robertson stated staff also discussed with BRW a two level use of the 10,000 Auto Parts site. Whether the upper level would be used for parking or for shops would depend on a market feasibility study. Mr. Kondrick stated it is nice to use the property for retail/ office use, but how will it attract customers if the parking is for LRT users? Ms. Sherek stated they could conceivably put offices and park and ride on the same site, because they could designate parking spaces that belong to just the offices. Ms. Sherek stated she is concerned about the access to Columbia Arena as an alternate site. In looking at Fridley as a whole and how people are going to get to the Arena, the access is not good. There is no access east/west. Traffic has to go up to Osborne or down to Mississippi to get to the west. Mr. Robertson stated that is why he is convinced that Columbia Arena should only be looked at as a back-up site. Mr. Dahlberg stated if it is possible to make it work at University/Mississippi, then that is where the park and ride site should be located. Mr. Robertson stated BRW has approached the Immanuel Christian Center at University/Osborne Road, and they are very interested in some type of compromise with the Rail Authority to assume some of the ownership and maintenance of their parking lot. Mr. Robertson stated that regarding the 57th site, Mayor Nee and HRA Chairperson Commers again feel that it is a terrible waste to ^ use this site for only park and ride. The main reason is this is the gateway to the City. Again, they want staff to look into the ,^�� � PLANNIN(� COMMI68ION MELTIN(�, NOVEMBER 8, 1989 PAGE 6 possibility of multi-use or even eliminating the park and ride station from 57th, and if the LRT switches over to Central on the south side of I-694, plan the station on the east end of the Target shopping center. Mr. Kondrick stated the 57th Street site is elevated to the east of University Avenue, 5-6 ft. higher than the street level. Wouldn't it be out of sight of the traffic coming from the south on University Avenue? Ms. Sherek stated if the LRT is going to go along University, and there is a station at Mississippi and a station somewhere around 51st Avenue, why do they need another station at 57th? Ms. Dacy stated the main reason is for the traffic off I-694. She stated here are a lot of outstanding problems with the 57th site right now. Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Kondrick had raised a point he had not thought about and that is that if there is a park and ride at 57th and if the LRT did not have to go over I-694, it might be possible to hide much of the parking to the east. It would not necessarily need to be right at the gateway to Fridley. Mr. Dahlberg stated when the projections are made of 2,000 cars between I-694 and Northtown on University Avenue, he would like to know what the area of draw is. Ms. Sherek stated that more than that, they need to demonstrate how they determine how many of those people are even going to downtown Minneapolis in the first place. Mr. Robertson stated two public information meetings have been scheduled. The first one is for the Minneapolis portion only on Monday, November 20, 1989, 7:00 p.m. at Edison High School. The second one is for the Southern Anoka County portion, I-694 to Minneapolis, on Wednesday, November 29, 1989, 7:00 p.m. at Murzyn Hall in Columbia Heights. A meeting time for northern Anoka County has not yet been scheduled. Mr. Robertson asked if the Planning Commission wished to have a briefing before that public meeting from the consultants. Does the Commission want mailing to go out to the citizens at the public meeting stage or at the public hearing stage? Ms. Sherek stated she would like notices to go out for the public meeting stage. Mr. Dahlberg stated the earlier, the better. This also illustrates to the people that the City feels it is important that they know � about these meetings. PLANNIN(� COMMIBBION MEETING. NOVEMBER 8, 1989 PAGE 7 �, Mr. Betzold stated he would also like to see notices at the public meeting stage. He would just as soon not have a briefing before the meeting. Mr. Kondrick stated that 20-25 years from now when in theory the LRT has e�anded out to Anoka, perhaps Ramsey, East Bethel, etc., and more park and ride stations are necessary. He would then think the significance of the parking lots in the City of Fridley would be greatly diminished. He would like to have the flexibility so those parking lots could then be changed back to something else. Mr. Dahlberg stated that in the situation described by Mr. Kondrick, when an area is no longer needed for parking, is there an option where the City or HRA can own the property and lease it to the County and the Rail Authority, rather than the County purchasing the property? Ms. Sherek stated this raised a question raised by the Planning Commission in the early discussions, and that was: Do they have to build all these stations at initial construction? BRW is saying they need 2,000 parking spaces, but what is wrong with starting out with Northtown, Mississippi/University, 51st or Target, and then when there is the demand five years later, they build another station. �'`�. Ms . Dacy stated they would have to have the land reserved under that option. Mr. Saba stated they have to be somewhat careful, because just the potential "need" for a parking lot in a certain area can stop or slow development. Mr. Barna stated his main concern about LRT is they are talking about public bodies developing the parking spaces. In looking at other cities, the vast majority of parking ramps are privately owned. Why isn't the City of Fridley looking at some type of two- level parking ramp/retail development on the southwest corner with assistance from the HRA, so that when or if the LRT does go in, they can use the extra space for retail or whatever? 2. CONSIDERATION OF CENTRAL AVENLTE CORRIDOR IMPLEMEATTATION PLAN: Ms. Dacy stated the Planning Commission spent quite a bit of time discussing this last spring and summer, and it went to the Council Conference meeting in July. She thought the Council members appreciated the exercise of going through the land use planning and intent. Their concern was there are other priorities in the community as far as development and tax increment dollars. Ms. Dacy stated that she used a diamond model to analyze the plan �` for improvements along Central Avenue, whether those are land use PLANNINa CONIlKI88ION MEETIN�. NOVEMBER 8, 1989 PAGE 8 ,� or physical improvements. The four components of the diamond are Mission, Power, Structure, and Resources. Ms. Dacy stated they are looking at three phases over the next ten years. The components of Phase I respond to the Council's mission of land use compatibility and appearance. The components of Phase II depend on market forces to determine the timing of the various components. The components of Phase III emphasize economic development and redevelopment. Ms. Dacy stated staff is asking for the Planning Commission's concurrence of this phased approach with any recommended changes. Staff's intent is to present any recommended changes and this analysis to the City Council for review and concurrence. Mr. Kondrick commended staff on a tremendous outline. Ms. Sherek stated the area from Onan north on Central Avenue is in danger of becoming a slum, and it is getting worse every year. Do they want to let that happen? There are already pockets like this in the City, and do they want to add to it? By coming up with a comprehensive plan and continuing toward systematic code enforcement, and having other plans for these properties if they should go up for sale. They need to put the plan together and have ,^ some kind of "vision" of what Central Avenue should look like. With Moore Lake Commons, there is going to be spin-off development. The Commissioners agreed. Mr. Kondrick stated they have to be very specific about what they want to see along the Central Avenue Corridor. Mr. Barna stated that whether Onan develops or not, they want to see that northwest corner changed, from 73rd Avenue to Fireside. Mr. Dahlberg stated he did not think it was appropriate for the Commission, as a planning body, to dictate the types of development unless it is within a specified district like this is. Within a tax increment district, they can do that, but outside the district, they cannot. If Onan does not develop, then the district is reduced dramatically. They can change the boundary, but not significantly, because 700 of the land area has to be considered blighted. So, it becomes a very small area that they have any influence or control over. He thought a plan is good, and this outline is an excellent beginning. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Sherek, to accept the Central Avenue Corridor Implementation Plan as submitted by staff. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYS, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED ^ THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. �, � � PLANNIN(3 COIrIIMI88ION MEETIN(�, NOVEMBER 8, 1989 PAGE 9 3. CONSIDERATION OF 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATES: Ms. Dacy stated staff is proposing two options for 1990 Planning Commission meeting dates. Currently, the Planning Commission meets the same week as the City Council. This method produces an irregular schedule and poses some problems for staff in preparing two or more agenda packets in one week. The Council wants to maintain meeting on the first and third Mondays for consistency. The Council is willing to go along with whatever option the Planning Commission chooses--the same week as Council, as it has been in the past; or, switching to the second and fourth Wednesdays. Mr. Barna stated that since the Council has decided they want to continue to have final action on all variances, because of the current process where the Appeals Commission minutes must first be received by the Planning Commission before going to the Council, this delays the petitioner up to 20 days. If they go to a new schedule, then the City Council should have some kind of pipeline where the Appeals Commission minutes can bypass the Planning Commission. Mr. Betzold agreed. The Planning Commission will receive the minutes anyway. It did not matter when the minutes come to the Planning Commission. Mr. Betzold stated he had no problem with changing the meeting dates to the second and fourth Wednesdays. If it does not work, they can always change back. Ms. Sherek stated that if they change these dates, then staff should be sure and tell builders and developers the timeline up front. Mr. Dahlberg stated he would like to see the Planning Commission meetings scheduled every second and fourth Wednesdays, except in January, May, and July. MOTION by Ms. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Saba, to adopt a calendar for the Planning Commission for 1990, changing the meeting dates to the second and fourth Wednesdays, except in those months (January, May, July) when the second and fourth Wednesdays follow the Council meetings. The 1990 meeting dates are as follows: January 17 and 31 February 14 and 28 March 14 and 28 April 11 and 25 May 16 and 30 June 13 and 27 July 11 and 25 August 15 and 29 September 12 and 26 October 10 and 24 November 14 and 28 December 12 ,�"`� PLANNING COl�lI88ION MEETIN�3, NOVEMBER 8, 1989 PA(3L 10 IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER80N BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. 4. RECEIVE OCTOBER 12. 1989. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES• MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to receive the October 12, 1989, Housing & Redevelopment Authority minutes. OPON A VOICE VOTE, AI,L VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BETZOLD DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIIBLY. ADJOURNMENT• MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Dahlberg, to adjourn the meeting. IIpon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Chairperson Betzold declared the October 12, 1989, Planninq Commission meetinq adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ��.�--a-� � Lyn e aba Recording Secretary �