09-26-05 Joint PC-CC Minutes
.
.
Joint Meeting
City Council and Planning Commission
1.394 Corridor Study
September 26, 2005
A joint meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission was held at the
Golden Valley City Hall, Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden
Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, September 26, 2005. Chair Keysser called the meeting
to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Hackett, Keysser, Rasmussen,
Schmidgall and Waldhauser and Mayor, Loomis and Council Members Freiberg,
Grayson, Pentel and Shaffer. Also present were City Manager, Tom Burt, Assistant City
Manager, Jeanne Andre, Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes, Public
Works Director, Jeannine Clancy, URS Planning Consultants David Showalter, Suzanne
Rhees and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman
I. Approval of Minutes
Approval of Minutes from the September 12, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting
MOVED by Hackett, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to
approve the September 12, 2005 minutes as submitted.
II.
Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
No reports were given.
III. Other Business
No other business was discussed.
IV. 1.394 Corridor Study - by URS, Planning Consultant
A. Public Input - Lessons Learned
. Business Survey
. Residential Survey and July 27 Roundtable
. Visual Preference
. Council/ Planning Commission Photographs
Rhees referred to the visual preference survey and explained that there were several
images that people ranked in terms of their own preferences that were then divided into
the following categories: Medium-High Density Housing, Mixed-Use Development,
Commercial Buildirgs, Office/Business Park/Industrial Development, Parking and
. Streetscape Desidn and Signs.
.
.
.
i
Joint meeting of t~e City Council and Planning Commission
I
September 26, 2005
Page 2 i
She stated that in regard to the Medium-High Density Housing they learned that the
materials and detailing were the most important attributes and that brick buildings
generally scored higher than stucco buildings. In the Mixed-Use category she stated
that traditional building forms, contrasting colors, quality materials and streetscape
activity all had high scores and buildings with flat facades scored lower. In the
Commercial category masonry and stucco combinations were preferred and metal
buildings received the lowest scores. In the Office/Business Park/Industrial
Development category the newer, multi-story office buildings were preferred while older
office and industrial buildings received lower scores. In the Parking and Streetscape
Design category people preferred wide landscaped buffers between sidewalks and
surface parking areas. Parking structures received a medium score and un-landscaped
surface parking areas received the lowest scores. In the Signs category the highest
ratings went to signs designed for the pedestrian main street environment. The least
preferred signs were large, brightly colored wall signs and gas station signs. Rhees
stated that the information from the Visual Preference Survey will be helpful when they
start to do design guidelines for this area.
Rhees referred to the Resident Survey and discussed some of the findings. She stated
that people liked the Laurel Avenue greenbelt area and disliked the traffic, parking lots,
road network and run-down buildings. She added that people expressed that they would
like to see a grocery store and more public gathering places in the Corridor area.
Rhees referred to the Business Survey and stated that they learned that the things
businesses like about the Corridor area are the location, the cost of the property and the
accessibility to the area. She said that the main things businesses disliked were the cost
to lease and the accessibility to their sites.
Rhees referred to the Resident Roundtable and stated that some of the challenges
discussed were the "hodgepodge" quality in the area, traffic congestion, confusing traffic
patterns, limited retail options, poor pedestrian environment and the lack of continuity on
the frontage road. She said that some of the suggestions for improvements were
planted medians, traffic calming, redesigning the frontage road from Louisiana to Xenia,
adding more capacity at the park and ride location and adding north/south sidewalk
connections.
Grayson asked if there was any demographic information on the residential survey.
Andre stated that the survey did not ask for any demographic information.
Cera referred to the business survey and asked if any of the results talked about what
employees want to have the area. Andre explained that the surveys were taken more
from an owner or manager perspective. Grimes added that the people he has spoken
with have said they would like more shops, coffee places and more diverse restaurants.
B. Principles for the 1-394 Corridor Study
Rhees explained that the Principles for the Corridor study are a draft and that she is
looking for input. She discussed each of the following principles:
Joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission
September 26, 2005
Page 3
.
1. Enable the corridor to evolve toward greater diversity. A mix of activities, uses
and densities will help to sustain the corridor through changing economic cycles,
consumer preferences and housing trends. Mixed uses can create synergies and
increase the level of pedestrian activity.
2. Maximize integration rather than separation of land uses, where appropriate.
Many land uses can benefit from increased integration with one another, including
neighborhood-serving retail, multi-family and senior housing, offices, and low-impact
services. Other land uses, such as auto-oriented commercial or industrial uses, can
benefit from integration with similar uses, but need to be buffered from residential
neighborhoods.
3. Maintain the corridor as an employment center. Jobs within the corridor help
maintain Golden Valley's jobs-housing balance while sustaining commercial
enterprises.
.
4. Improve the visual coherence and attractiveness of the corridor. Improvements
in streetscapes, landscaped areas, open spaces, buildings and parking/service
areas all contribute to a more unified and visually appealing environment, with an
increased sense of identity. Buildings and other private improvements should make
positive contributions to the district and the broader public realm, while public
improvements should set the standard for private investment.
5. Improve connectivity for all modes. The development of 1-394 and subsequent
road realignments have resulted in a discontinuous and confusing circulation
system. Improvements in east-west vehicular circulation and north-south pedestrian
circulation are most needed; however, roadways should be designed to be attractive
and safe for all modes of travel.
6. Foster neighborhood-serving retail and services. Commercial development
should include a variety of small independent businesses and larger enterprises that
serve City residents, supplementing and broadening the current mix of commercial
uses.
7. Maintain the functioning of intersections and highway interchanges. The
functioning of the 1-394 interchanges at Xenia and Louisiana Avenues, and other key
intersections within the corridor, is critical to maintaining commercial viability and
neighborhood quality of life. New development must be carefully planned, evaluated
and designed so that interchanges and intersections continue to function at an
adequate level.
.
Freiberg referred to principal number five and asked if there has been any interest
studying the north-south vehicular circulation. Rhees said that the north-south vehicular
circulation wasn't discussed a lot at the Resident Roundtable.
.
.
.
Joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission
September 26, 2005
Page 4
Pentel stated that the Principles are general comments and that they are not specific
enough yet. Rhees stated that she has seen principles like these put to good use. She
said the principles could vary by area.
Grayson said he thinks it is worth moving ahead with these principles.
Showalter had the Council Members and Commissioners look at the photographs that
they took on their tour of different corridor areas and write down any comments they
had. He then discussed the positive, neutral and negative comments about the
photographs.
C. Implementing Principles - Alternative Approaches
Showalter referred to several maps and conceptual drawings showing different
alternatives for the Corridor area. He discussed the properties susceptibility to change,
building values versus land values, circulation and connectivity and landscaping.
D. Next Steps M schedule
Showalter stated that they are anticipating another joint City Council/Planning
Commission meeting in November prior to doing an open house for the public in early
December. Andre added that there was some thought about sharing the Principles with
the community in the next newsletter.
V. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 pm.