Loading...
EQEA 07/09/2019 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND ENERGY COMMISSION Fridley Municipal Center, 7071 University Ave Ne AGENDA WǒƌǤ ВͲ ЋЉЊВ Location:Fridley Civic Campus,Banfill Room,7:00 PM Call to Order Approve Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Minutes 1)Review June 3Minutes New Business ActiveTransportation Plan Old Business 1)Finding Your Fun in Fridleyupdate 2)Energy Action Plan update Other Recycling Drop off- July 13 FindingYour Fun in FridleyWorkshop 2- July11 FridleyHistoricHomeTour- July 21 FindingYour Fun in FridleyWorkshop 3- July25 FindingYour Fun in FridleyWorkshop Next meeting August 13, 2019 (presentation from Coon Creek Watershed District)at 7:00 PM at Fridley Civic Campus Adjourn ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND ENERGY COMMISSION Fridley Municipal Center, 7071 University Ave Ne MINUTES WǒƓĻ ЌͲ ЋЉЊВ SPECIAL JOINT MEETING WITH PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Location: City of Fridley Civic Campus, Fireside Room and Parks Tour Call to Order Chair Heintz called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. Members present: Pete Borman, Mike Heintz, EB Graham, Ryan Gerhard, Dave Kondrick, Shanna Larson (late arrival) Members absent: None Chair Hanson called the Environmental Quality and Energy Commission to order. Members present: Mark Hanson, Justin Foell, Amy Dritz, Nick Olberding Absent: Heidi Ferris, Paul Westby, Sam Stoxen Staff: Deborah Dahl, Director of Community Services and Employee Relations; Rachel Workin, Environmental Planner Other: Steve Eggert, Council Member; Jeff Jensen, Operations Manager- Streets, Parks, and Facilities Approval of Minutes Chair Heintz called for a motion to adopt the minutes from the May 6, 2019 Parks and Recreation Meeting. Commissioner Kondrick made a motion; Commissioner Graham seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED unanimously Chair Hansen called for a motion to adopt the minutes from the May 13, 2019 Environmental Quality and Energy Commission minutes. Commissioner Foell made a motion; Commissioner Olberding seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED unanimously Approval of Agenda Chair Heintz called for a motion to adopt the agenda for the June 3 meeting agenda. Commissioner Borman made the motion; Commissioner Graham seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED unanimously New Business 1) Welcome Ms. Dahl welcomed the two groups and described the tour of the Parks to occur this meeting. Chair Heintz shared that the City had one the Our Courts. Our Future basketball court contest for a new basketball court at Madsen Park and thanked staff for promoting the voting platform. Commissioner Kondrick asked how they picked the three finalists. Ms. Dahl shared that the City was one of many applicants, she did not know the criteria by which the 3 metro area cities were selected. Commissioner Borman asked how Madsen Park was selected as the entrant. Mr. Jensen shared that it was a combination of need, visibility, and use. Mr. Jensen shared that the presence of a parking lot provides Madsen Park with a high level of opportunity. 2) Parks Master Plan Ms. Dahl described the Parks Master Plan process. She requested that the Commissioners participation in the process by 1) attending the facilitated discussion, 2) leaving feedback through Social Pinpoint, 3) encouraging others to complete Social Pinpoint. She shared that Social Pinpoint would be a clearinghouse for information in order to receive it in a streamlined manner. Commissioner Dritz asked how long the survey would be open, Ms. Dahl said July 7. Commissioner Kondrick asked if the City had received any feedback on removing parklands. Ms. Workin shared that the feedback they had received through Social Pinpoint was not to remove parkland but that certain amenities were not well used. Mr Jensen said that his staff get comments regarding large green space areas that are be under-utilized. Ms. Dahl shared commissions previously reviewed. Ms. Workin said that the Park Master Plan would build on these trends rather than duplicate effort. She said that the Comprehensive Plan is a more theoretical document, while the Master Plan is more of a work plan. Mr. Jensen talked about staff experience touring neighborhoods parks in Roseville where the City had constructed buildings that functioned as mini-community centers. Ms. Workin decentralized community centers. Chair Heintz recommended sharing Social Pinpoint on Nextdoor. Ms. Dahl said they could provide Commissioners with language to share the survey. She shared a document prepared by Alyssa Kruzel on how Commissioners could help with the process. Commissioner Kondrick stated the importance of knowing the demographics, what the age of the kids are and knowing when areas are going to change. Ms. Workin said the plan would look at developing standards for different types of parks. Ms. Dahl discussed the professional facilitators that would be assisting with the process. Mr. Jensen provided the example of Madsen that is an area park that would provide a centralized place for service, and how it could be elevated, for example with a building. Chair Kondrick asked how much the building at Springbrook cost. Mr. Jensen said approximately $400,000. He said that handling the drainage at Madsen has continued to be an issue. The bus arrived and Commissioners left for the tour. 3)Tour The group toured Madsen Park, Flanery Par, Creek View Park, Moore Lake Park, and Riverview Heights Park. Mr Jensen pointed at areas that were used. Commissioners discussed the possibility of relocating structures. Mr. Jensen stated it was almost always cheaper to build new. Mr. Jensen encouraged the group to think about the different levels of parks and the services they provided. The group exited the vehicle at Moore Lake and Riverview Heights Parks. At Moore Lake the group discussed which properties the City owned. Mr. Jensen shared the history of the park and that the aesthetics of Moore Lake are largely influenced by its natural condition as a shallow lake/wetland that had been excavated, rather than a water quality issue. He shared the role of the bubbler and the liner to keep water circulating and that they Mr. Jensen said that they plan to shrink the parking lot. Mr. Jensen discussed that these larger parks like Moore proximity to the schools and important place for play. At Riverview Heights Park the group discussed the importance of increa 4)Return The group returned to the Fireside room. Chair Heintz thanked the EQEC for attending. Ms. Dahl shared the document on how Commissioners could be involved again and said that Ms. Kruzel would follow up with an email. Adjournment Commissioner Dritz moved to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Foell seconded the motion. The meeting Environmental Quality and Energy Commission adjourned at 8:33. aĻĻƷźƓŭ ЊΏ WǒƌǤ Њ͵aĻĻƷźƓŭ ƭĭŷĻķǒƌĻ ƩĻǝźĻǞ Ћ͵tƩĻƭĻƓƷğƷźƚƓ ƚŅ ƷƩğźƌ ķĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ ğƓķ ƒğźƓƷĻƓğƓĭĻ Ќ͵hǒƷƩĻğĭŷ ƩĻǝźĻǞ Λ{hare feedback from Social Pinpoint and University Ave corridor study) Ѝ͵LķĻƓƷźŅźĭğƷźƚƓ ƚŅ ƦƩźƚƩźƷǤ ǩƚƓĻƭ Ў͵5źǝźķĻ źƓƷƚ ǩƚƓĻƭ aĻĻƷźƓŭ ЋΏ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ Њ͵bĻĻķƭ ƩĻǝźĻǞ ğ͵/źƷǤ Ʒƚ ƦƩĻƭĻƓƷ ƦĻƩĭĻźǝĻķ ƓĻĻķƭΉŭğƦƭ Ĭ͵9v9/ Ʒƚ ğķķΉķĻƌĻƷĻ aĻĻƷźƓŭ ЌΏ hĭƷƚĬĻƩ Њ͵/ƚƭƷ ƩĻǝźĻǞ aĻĻƷźƓŭ ЍΏ bƚǝĻƒĬĻƩ Њ͵tƩźƚƩźƷźǩğƷźƚƓ ğĭƷźǝźƷǤ aĻĻƷźƓŭ ЎΏ 5ĻĭĻƒĬĻƩ Њ͵CźƓğƌ ƦƌğƓ ğĭĭĻƦƷğƓĭĻ Memorandum Planning Division _____________________________________________________________________ DATE: July 13, 2019 TO: Environmental Quality and Energy Commission members FROM: Rachel Workin, Environmental Planner Energy Action Plan SUBJECT: th On November 26 the City Council approved an Energy Action Plan for the City of Fridley. In order to achieve the goals of the plan, an implementation plan was drafted. The below is a monthly update to the EQEC on progress toward completing the implementation plan: May- June 2019 4 social media posts Newsletter item on solar panels 49rs Day Parade Home Energy Squad signup event at Park Plaza Direct email to apartment complexes Developed material for businesses at Development Review committee Website updates Continue direct calling of Fridley apartment complexes Upcoming Events Launch outreach to faith communities FRIDLEY: HWYS 47 (UNIVERSITY AVE) & 65 (CENTRAL AVE) Corridor Development Initiative Summary Report and Final Recommendations Submitted by: Gretchen Nicholls, Twin Cities LISC Sponsored by: June 2019 City of Fridley and MN Department of Transportation INTRODUCTION The City of Fridley, in partnership with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) enlisted Twin Cities LISC’s Corridor Development Initiative (CDI) to facilitate a series of community workshops from February to April, 2019 to gather community input to guide future improvements for Highways 47 (University Avenue) and 65 (Central Avenue). The recommendations were presented to the Fridley City Council on June 24, 2019 for their consideration. Input gathered by Fridley community members has been clear. Traveling from east to west in Fridley often hugely problematic for local residents trying navigate or cross, especially by foot or by bike. The thought of concern. The tension between regional and local needs is at a crossroads in Fridley – in its truest form. take considerable time, effort and resources, as well as collaboration between the City of Fridley, Anoka County and redevelopment efforts to achieve long-term goals. Spring Lake Park, Columbia Heights and affected neighboring communities could be collaborated with for continuity of design. To begin addressing these problems and challenges that exist along Highways 47 and 65, the city and MnDOT balance between these tensions. This is especially important as land uses along the corridor continue to evolve serve? What do we want these corridors to be? And how can we begin planning for those changes to happen? 1 HWY 65 / CENTRAL AVE HWY 47 / UNIVERSITY AVE 69TH AVE NE RICE CREEK MISSISSIPPI RIVER MISSISSIPPI ST. NE 61ST AVE. NE 57TH AVE. NE OVERVIEW Highways 47 and 65 provide north-south regional mobility to commuters traveling from Anoka County (and in the case of TH 65, from areas even further north) to the core of the Twin Cities. The two corridors bisect the city of Fridley and create barriers to east- for pedestrians and bikes that attempt to navigate wide intersection crossings. To solve wait times even outside periods of peak north-south travel cause pedestrians and vehicles to take risks. Pedestrians cross without a cross walk signal, and vehicles are more likely to run red lights. like a rural highway or throughway with wide medians and expansive right of way), speeds can be excessive, which hinders east-west connectivity and mobility for all users – motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. The lack of safety is felt and documented at Ave, Mississippi, 69th Ave, 73rd Ave, 81st Ave, and Osborne Rd). The City of Fridley, MnDOT and Anoka County share these concerns over safety. Both MnDOT and Anoka County have conducted safety studies to identify ways to solve for safety concerns, and they are in the early stages of implementing those improvements. 2 Bus stops along both corridors need improvement, which would increase transit as a viable option. From the dangerous placement of the bus stops (e.g. near freeway entrance ramps), poor maintenance, lack of lighting and access, inadequate snow removal service, and the need for updating in general, there is much that can be done to make transit more user-friendly and safe. Another dimension to the discussion is around creating a sense of place and identity. People slow down when they see something interesting. According to MnDOT data there are more local trips on University Avenue than Central Avenue. Fridley wants people to know they are in their community, and to share a sense of pride about what that means. would capture the unique characteristics that make Fridley stand out? University Avenue (Highway 47) has become more of a main-street for local trips, suggesting that future improvements should work toward creating a local feel with and create a greater sense of place. Meanwhile, Highway 65 is used more as a principle speed levels, and multimodal accommodation. In addition, the southern portion of both corridors (I-694 – Mississippi Street) warrant slower speeds due to the closer proximity of the land uses to the street, than the northern portions (73rd Avenue – Osborne Rd). a number of supporting strategies. 3 RECOMMENDATIONS The City of Fridley, Anoka County, and MnDOT have discussed the changing nature of University Avenue (Highway 47 and Central Avenue (Highway 65) for many years due to changing land uses and properties closer to University and Central Avenues. The unsightly nature of these transportation corridors has created aesthetic concerns. Equally important is how the highways relate to, and what they say about, the community. MnDOT and the County also perceive the change, and invite the opportunity to hear from the community to enlighten their policy decisions. To that end, the following goals I. Improve safety for non-motorized (pedestrians and bicyclists ) and motorized users at key intersections and along the highways (57th Ave, 61st Ave, Mississippi, 69th Ave, 73rd Ave, 81st Ave, and Osborne Rd) . II. Improve the east-west roadways to better serve the community and invite greater mobility for all III. Enhance the sense of place and community identity - including but not limited to identifying one as a main street IV. Better align Highways 47 and 65 with redevelopment and evolving land uses and densities V. Provide better accessibility and connectivity to local businesses and community destinations VI. Improve transit options and functionality (i.e. bus rapid transit currently being planned the Highway 65) VII. Work toward mitigating air, noise, water pollution and environmental impact The proposed strategies that correlate with these goals are listed in Attachment A: Goals and Strategies for Highway 47 and Highway 65. 4 OVERVIEW OF THE CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE PROCESS The Corridor Development Initiative consisted of four community workshops held at Fridley City Hall. Over 130 community members attended the workshops, aimed at gathering input on community values and concerns, exploring options for improving the corridors, and learning from other communities that shared their stories. Attendance was strong throughout the four workshops – a testimony to the importance of these issues for the community. The process involved a technical team composed of a transportation planning expert (WSB Engineering), a facilitator, designers, and city staff to inform and support participants as they explored ideas. Participants considered a range of development options for two corridors, The Corridor Development Initiative pulls citizens out pedestrian and bike access, safety, and alignment with evolving land uses. of the reactionary role that they play in community FRIDLEY CDI ADVISORY GROUP development decisions, and An advisory group provided guidance for the CDI process, into a proactive role where forming outreach strategies, and supporting the design and they play an active part in content of the community workshops. Thank you to the directing development for Advisory Group members, who contributed greatly to the their community. It models a new way to engage cities Advisory Group Members: and communities by raising MnDOT • Melissa Barnes, the level of dialogue around MnDOT • Sheila Kauppi, MnDOT • Renee Raduenz, redevelopment issues, and MnDOT • Lizzie Pohl, setting the stage for future Anoka County • Joe MacPherson, development. Fridley Environmental Quality and • Mark Hanson, Energy Commission Bike and Walk Group • Ron Mattson, CDI facilitator • Barbara Raye, CDI coordinator • Gretchen Nicholls, 5 Above: Save the Date postcard that was mailed to residents. City representatives: Fridley City Manager • Wally Walsopal, Fridley Community Development Director • Scott Hickok, COMMUNITY OUTREACH A variety of methods were used to notify the community about the Fridley HWYS 47 and 65 CDI community workshops. Information about the community workshops was • Postcard mailings • Fliers, posters, and email notices • Electronic sign-boards along University Avenue • Facebook and other social media outlets • The City of Fridley web site Child care and translation services were available upon request to limit obstacles for participation. Food and beverages were also provided. All participants that signed in for 6 ON-LINE SURVEYS MN Department of Transportation further enhanced the community workshop process by providing opportunities for people to provide input through on-line surveys. Three surveys were developed to supplement the information gathered from the in- 1, the second survey gathered feedback on the scenarios created through workshop provide in Attachments B, F, and H. CDI TECHNICAL TEAM The LISC CDI technical team lead the community workshops with support from City Center for Policy Planning and Performance (facilitator and • Barbara Raye, evaluator) WSB Engineering (transportation planner) • Jack Corkle, (Interactive exercise – Wksp 2) • Katie Thering, Tangible Consulting (Interactive exercise – Wksp 2) • Tom Leighton, Twin Cities LISC (CDI Coordinator) • Gretchen Nicholls, Workshop I: Gathering Information Thursday, February 21, 2019 (Manager, North Area, MN Department of Transportation), • Sheila Kauppi and (WSB Engineering) on Transportation Planning 101. • Andy Hingeveld 1.) In what ways are HWYS 47 & 65 an asset to the City of Fridley? Themes: brings people into the community. 2.) In what ways have HWYS 47 & 65 changed during your time in Fridley? Themes: residential and commercial uses, more vehicles, more safety concerns for pedestrians and community for people from other places. 7 3.) How does HWYS 47 & 65 impact your interest and/or ability to walk, bike or use public transportation? Struggle crossing intersections, unsafe for kids, strollers or people with Themes: barriers for bikers and pedestrians, great access to Anoka County trail system. 4.) How does HWYS 47 & 65 impact your ability to travel (by any means) east and west across Fridley? Lights are too long, not safe, choice of travel usually only by car for safe Themes: crossing, stressful to drive, lack of sidewalks, tough to go east-west during busy hours, cross streets are very valuable, bus stops can be dangerous. Workshop II: Development Opportunities – Mapping Exercise Thursday, March 7, 2019 Participants rotated to four tables that represented different portions (north and south) of Highways 47 and 65 to identify strategies to improve access, safety, and sense of place. Representatives from the four tables reported out to the large group to share what was discussed. The ideas were mapped out in a summary sheet for future consideration (See Attachment G). 8 Workshop III: Panel Discussion Thursday, March 21, 2019 Context Sensitive Solutions, MnDOT • Scott Bradley, • Kristin Asher, City of White Bear Lake • Anne Kane, City of Shoreview • Mark Maloney, WSB Engineering • Jack Corkle, 65. Scott Bradley (MnDOT) shared images that illustrate how to create more complete transportation corridors using context sensitive solutions. Community members learned from their experiences, and what to consider when considering various options (e.g. costs, ongoing maintenance needs, unique elements to create a sense of place, leveraging improvements from private investment, etc.). For a full overview of the Panel Discussion, and presentations see Attachments I and J. Workshop IV: Framing Recommendations Thursday, April 4, 2019 Draft Goals and Strategies were reviewed and edited by participants to reach consensus 9 COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION The four community workshops were well attended, averaging about 60 participants per session. Participants were largely residents, with some business owners from Transportation, Anoka County, and Metro Transit staff also attended. Over 50% of attendees participated in 2 or more of the four workshops, and over 27% attended three or more sessions. A detailed list of attendees is provided in Attachment K. EVALUATION SUMMARY OF THE CDI PROCESS Feedback forms were provided at the end of each of the four sessions. Not all participants completed an evaluation form and not all those that did return a form answered all of the questions. Over Only one out of eighty-six responses indicated they would not recommend the Questions were also asked to assess what participants saw as helpful/working well and what could be improved. Responses to the question of what worked well for participations throughout the four sessions included: • All four sessions were good and all the activities were helpful • (4) The table/small group discussions and then large group consensus • Good conversations • So many opportunities for feedback • Start and stop on time Responses to what could have been improved included: • More time for discussion and Q&A, additional session(s), longer meetings • More space and smaller groups – some discussions felt crowed or rushed due to size of group • Clarity of what has already been decided • Better slides/less content on each one – made it hard to read/see 10 Participants were also asked what they gained from the process. People reported gaining: • • (5) New information • (3) Different perspectives of other residents and their suggestions • (2) Community support • (2) What also a vision of what our city could be • Seeing strong alignment on safety Sample comments included: It was great to hear different perspectives throughout the community Understanding a wider range of viewpoints People seem to have the same concerns. They want a safe, welcoming, “friendly Fridley” to grow and maintain Final comments were also welcome. Some examples are: • Almost all people in the audience are white. How can you get people of color to the table? • I appreciate the effort of my city to organize and offer this opportunity. • • Thank you for including us in this process. • Good value for our $$ does not mean the same as cheap. • Thank you for all your extra efforts. It’s not always easy to manage groups. CONCLUSION The Corridor Development Initiative submits the attached Goals and Strategies for Highway 47 (University Avenue) and Highway 65 (Central Avenue) recommendations to the Fridley City Council and Planning Commission, and the MN Department of Transportation for your consideration. 11 ATTACHMENTS A. Goals and Strategies for Highway 47 (University Avenue) and Highway 65 (Central Avenue) CDI recommendations C. Map of the study area D. Workshop I presentation (Transportation Planning 101 – WSB Engineering) E. Small Group Discussion Notes (Workshop I) F. On-line survey responses – Improving the Fridley corridors G. Mapping Exercise Summary Sheets (Workshop II) H. On-line survey responses to mapping scenarios I. Panel Discussion Meeting Notes (Workshop III) Bear Lake) K. Attendance list for the Fridley HWYS 47 & 65 CDI workshops 12 ATTACHMENT A. GOALS AND STRATEGIES FOR HIGHWAY 47 (UNIVERSITY AVENUE) AND HIGHWAY 65 (CENTRAL AVENUE) CDI RECOMMENDATIONS 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ATTACHMENT B. ON-LINE SURVEY RESPONSES TO FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS 26 27 ATTACHMENT C. MAP OF THE STUDY AREA HWY 65 / CENTRAL AVE HWY 47 / UNIVERSITY AVE 69TH AVE NE RICE CREEK MISSISSIPPI RIVER MISSISSIPPI ST. NE 61ST AVE. NE 57TH AVE. NE 28 ATTACHMENT D. WORKSHOP I PRESENTATION (TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 101 – WSB ENGINEERING) 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 ATTACHMENT E. SMALL GROUP DISCUSSION NOTES (WORKSHOP 1) 55 56 57 58 59 60 ATTACHMENT F. ON-LINE SURVEY RESPONSES – IMPROVING THE FRIDLEY CORRIDORS 61 62 63 64 65 66 ATTACHMENT G. MAPPING EXERCISE SUMMARY SHEETS (WORKSHOP II) 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 FRIDLEY STREET DESIGN OPTIONS WORKSHOP University Avenue (Hwy 47) & Hwy 65 direction would give the largest bang for your buck. University? Hwy 65 is a way to get to Blaine, more industrial. University is slower and more business oriented. Light up the road signs for better visibility. Several signs are old & cracked. Pedestrian safety, increased lighting, and improved median landscaping were themes throughout all of the intersections. Make sure to get feedback from the disabled community on what Add more “Welcome to Fridley” signs. isn’t working for them. Paint stop light poles throughout the corridor. Rust is ugly. Hwy 65 currently feels like just a through road, not a “place” Identify locations for public art along 47 and/or 65. Fridley is not walkable. Study County Hwy 10 & Able for an example of good light timing that works. Residents are not aware of what the businesses are, they aren’t serving the community. Want more local businesses. Fridley needs a system of bike lanes/trails, not only recreational but to get around. A bike path along 65 is needed, even across Moore Lake. We want more from Anoka County. safe for kids. Biking to get to regional trail is not safe. Remember to address drainage and deal with heavy rain. Don’t disturb the ecology of Moore Lake. Add features to the Where does the snow go when plowed? Where is it piled up? park to draw activity. Connect Rice Creek Trail to Moore Lake Park. City of Fridley | Workshop II Summary Sheets | March 7, 2019 79 ATTACHMENT H. ON-LINE SURVEY RESPONSES TO MAPPING SCENARIOS 80 81 82 83 84 ATTACHMENT I. PANEL DISCUSSION MEETING NOTES (WORKSHOP III) 85 86 87 88 89 ATTACHMENT J. PRESENTATIONS FROM WORKSHOP III (SCOTT BRADLEY, CITY OF RICHFIELD, CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE) 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 ATTACHMENT K. ATTENDANCE LIST FOR THE FRIDLEY HWYS 47 & 65 CDI WORKSHOPS 119 120 ATTACHMENT L. ANNOUNCEMENT/PUBLICITY FLYER FOR THE FRIDLEY HWYS 47 & 65 CDI WORKSHOPS FRIDLEY: UNIVERSITY AVE AND HWY 65 | CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS How would you improve University Avenue and HWY 65? The City of Fridley invites you to an important conversation to guide the future design of University Avenue and HWY 65. What are the community’s goals and priorities from a transportation and livability viewpoint? How about the aesthetic look (i.e. fences)? Do the corridors work well for the businesses, and other evolving uses? With support from a team of design and transportation experts, community members will possible participate in a series of workshops to explore what’s for these key corridors. MARK YOUR CALENDARS! We encourage participants to attend all four events. All events are free and open to the public. WORKSHOP III: PANEL DISCUSSION: LEARNING WORKSHOP I: GATHER INFORMATION FROM OTHER CITIES Thursday, February 21, 2019; 6:00 - 8:00 pm Thursday, March 21, 2019; 6:00 - 8:00 pm Fridley City Hall Fridley City Hall 7071 University Ave NE, Fridley, MN 55432 7071 University Ave NE, Fridley, MN 55432 What is important and unique about University Explore the opportunities and challenges of street Avenue and HWY 65? What are the concerns about mobility and aesthetics, and what can be improved? on their experiences, and inform a strategic road map for the future of University Avenue and HWY 65. WORKSHOP II: STREET DESIGN OPTIONS EXERCISE WORKSHOP IV: FRAMING RECOMMENDATIONS Thursday, March 7, 2019; 6:00 - 8:00 pm Thursday, April 4, 2019; 6:00 - 8:00 pm Fridley City Hall Fridley City Hall 7071 University Ave NE, Fridley, MN 55432 7071 University Ave NE, Fridley, MN 55432 Join your neighbors in an interactive workshop to create alternative street design scenarios for University Contribute to the creation of street design Avenue and HWY 65. Design and transportation recommendations for University Avenue and HWY experts will be on hand to share ideas and insights. 65, which will be submitted to the Fridley City Council and Planning Commission, and MN Dept of Transportation. Sponsored by the City of Fridley & FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: MN Dept of Transportation (MN DOT) Scott Hickok, City of Fridley at (763) 572-3590 or scott.hickok@fridleymn.gov Gretchen Nicholls, Twin Cities LISC at 651-265-2280 / gnicholls@lisc.org Or visit www.fridleymn.gov Or the TC LISC web site www.tclisc.org/twin_cities/grants_loans/corridor.php Childcare will be provided by request only. The Corridor Development Initiative Please RSVP to Gretchen Nicholls at 651-265-2280 is a program of Twin Cities LISC one week in advance of each workshop if you would like to request childcare. 121