Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-06-07 CC.PC Master Dev WS ~ ~HILLS Approved: 4/9/07 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANNING WORK SESSION MEETING MARCH 6, 2007 6:30 P.M. CITY HALL -- 1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, meeting convened at 6:30 pm by Mayor Stan Harpstead. Attendees: Stan Harpstead Dave McClung David Grant Brenda Holden Fran Holmes Dave Sand Andy Holewa Clayton Larson Michelle Wolfe Karen Barton James Lehnoff Mark Benson Jaimie Sloboden Eric Anderson Rick Collins Bruce Chamberlain Jeff McMenimen City Council/Mayor City Council City Council City Council City Council Planning Commission Planning Commission Planning Commission City of Arden Hills City of Arden Hills City of Arden Hills SEH SEH CCR, LLC CCR, LLC HKGi HKGi I. Recap of the Advisory Group Meeting Mr. Bruce Chamberlain discussed a couple ofthe ideas discussed and generated in the Advisory Group meeting. He mentioned the "Idea" and "Parking Lot" boards. The "Ideas" board captures a running list of the ideas brought up in the Advisory Group meetings for consideration in the master plan and/or planning process. The "Parking Lot" board captures topics for further discussion. These include topics such as environmental, public finance, tax impacts to development, etc. that may need follow up in a newsletter or on the website to provide more in-depth information than can be reviewed in the meetings. Meeting Minutes - TCAAP City CouncilPlanning Commission Worksession Mayor Stan Harpstead stated that it was a good concept but that some ofthe ideas may need to be let go after they've been discussed and considered. II. Traffic and Site Access Discussion 1. Jamie Sloboden (SEH) reviewed ongoing traffic and transportation planning efforts and site access. The traffic study area includes Arden Hills and surrounding communities: New Brighton, Shoreview, Mounds View. SEH is currently evaluating existing traffic conditions in the study area and is developing a 2030 forecast with and without TCAAP using the Twin Cities Regional Demand Model and developing transportation needs due to the traffic impacts due to future TCAAP development on I-35W, Highway 10, Highway 96, I-694. About 40,000 trips will use the regional transportation system to access TCAAP in the future (at full build out). Variation oftrip types will affect the design of the system. Final traffic forecasts will be dependant on completing the master plan. Average daily trips (for 2006 and projected for 2030) on the regional road network include: Interstate-35W -2006 136,000 vpd (vehicles per day) -2030 163,000 vpd US Highway 10 diagonal -2006 46,500 vpd -2030 50,000 vpd County Road 96 -2006 19,300 vpd -2030 30,000 vpd . Planned interchange improvements and/or changes include: County Road H Full movement/diamond/signalized/grade separated US Highway 10 Full movement/diamond/signalized/ grade separated Full movement/signalized/at grade County Road 96 County Road 96/ US Highway 10 Grade separated/non-signalized . Local connections/routes were discussed, including: North/South arterial on TCAAP site to provide relief from Highway system. Runs parallel with I-35W and aligns with Rice Creek Parkway to the north and Round Lake Blvd. to the south. North/South connection to County Road I to access ball fields and provide public safety access for the TCAAP development. . Regional system access planning includes access points at County Road H, US Highway 10, and County Road 96. 2 Meeting Minutes - TCAAP City CouncilPlanning Commission Worksession . Secondary access point at County Road 1. . The County Road H interchange requires full access and capacity expansion. . Complexities at County Road H interchange include: Rice Creek crossing US Highway 10 interchange proximity Compatibility with future I-35W expansion (potentially 12 lanes) . County Road 96/US Highway 10 interchange: Ramsey County has the lead on this project US Highway 10 will requires a grade separation Location of the access interchange is based on environmental constraints (Round Lake) TCAAP access aligns with new arterial. Compatibility with I-35W/CR 96 interchange will be an issue. Next steps: Develop forecasts based on Master Plan Refine designs to meet transportation demands Analyze and develop operational design AUAR - Mitigation Project development for interchanges. Questions/Comments: A question was asked why the traffic study does not look at impacts of traffic from TCAAP south of Interstate-694. Most ofthe Arden Hills community lives south of Interstate-694. Mr. Jaimie Sloboden noted that most of the impacts occur north of Interstate 694. The information is based on the Met Council 2030 traffic model. If it is found that traffic impacts south of Interstate 694 are substantial these will be studied too. A question was asked if the traffic study is being coordinated with traffic improvements being done at I-35W, US Highway 10 and County Road 17 Jaimie Sloboden stated "Yes". SEH Traffic Engineering performed the traffic studies for that proj ect and is aware ofthe impacts. A question was asked how many of the additional vehicle per day trips on Interstate 35W in 2030 are attributable to the traffic generated at TCAAP? Mr. Jaimie Sloboden responded about 10,000 in each direction (nls). 3 Meeting Minutes - TCAAP City CouncilPlanning Commission Worksession Does the arterial that runs parallel to I-35W have any value south of Highway 96? A question was asked if it will it be a county road? Mr. J aimie Sloboden stated that at this point, Ramsey County wants this road. It may not have significant value south of Highway 96. Concem was expressed about a bridge from New Brighton. A question was asked about who will be responsible for funding the interchange at County Road Hand I-35W? Mr. Bruce Chamberlain asked if the funding for that interchange will be included in the development's infrastructure costs. Ramsey County has turn-back funds available for Highway 96. Legislative efforts are getting underway to seek state and federal funding. Will the manufactured housing community be impacted by the development of the interchange on Highway 10? Mr. Jaimie Sloboden stated the County plans for the Highway 10 and Highway 96 interchange is a grade separated interchange. This is primarily due to land constraints (Round Lake). This eliminates access off 10 into the TCAAP site at the interchange and may require an interchange north of the intersection of 10/96 along US Highway 10. This may require an interchange at US Highway 10 that would have impacts to the manufactured housing community. The schematic plan shown indicates that. Mayor Stan Harpstead requested that we explore other options for the US Highway 10/County Road 96 interchange to see if impacts can be reduced. Mr. David Sand asked if the diamond interchange at US Highway 10 occur without the roadway connection that bisects the trailer park? The group concurred that we need more discussions with the County on interchange options. A question was asked if there is a condemnation issue at the manufactured housing community. Mr. J aimie Sloboden stated that they believe the roadway connection that bisects the manufactured housing community represents the plan the county supports. 4 Meeting Minutes - TCAAP City CouncilPlanning Commission Worksession Councilmember Holden asked ifthe City of Mounds View is going to help with funding the interchange at County Road H? Clearly it will benefit their community. Mayor Harpstead stated that both mayors (Arden Hills and Mounds View) will have to work together to gain federal funding. It benefits Mounds View too. Mr. David Sand asked if a transit hub been considered at County Road H to gain more federal funding? Mr. Rick Collins stated that funding strategies are being sought at the state and federal levels. Congressman Oberstar is being lobbied for this funding. Councilmember David McClung inquired about the intersection at County Road I? What happens to it when County Road H interchange is improved? Mr. Jaimie Sloboden noted that the County Road I interchange is part of the equation. MNDOT wants to eliminate either County Road H or County Road I interchange. If County Road H goes in, then County Road I may eventually go away. Shoreview will likely have issues with the connection of the TCAAP arterial to Rice Creek Parkway. City Administrator Michelle said that the City will be meeting with Mounds View and Shoreview soon to discuss many of these issues. Councilmember David Grant stated that we need cooperation from all surrounding communities. III. Land Use Plan Alternatives Preliminary land use concepts were presented including the following discussion points: I. Land Use Framework Diagram I. Bridges ideas to the Framework Vision - mix and locations of land uses 2. Site access points and relationships to land uses 3. Opportunities and constraints due to site access, noise, views and open space. 4. Commonalities between concepts-site access points, general land use locations, mix of uses. 2. Development Program 5 Meeting Minutes - TCAAP City CouncilPlanning Commission Worksession Mix of land uses - residential, office, retail, civic, open space Creates a complete, sustainable community - socially, economically, environmentally Variety of housing types and densities - to accommodate changing lifestyles, and a diverse and aging population Open space and storm water needs Ranges of uses, acres, units and commercial square feet The three preliminary concepts generally include the following amounts ofland uses distributed on the TCAAP site: Land Use Residential Public Open Space Office/Employment Public Right of Way Retail Civic % of Site Area 28% 27% 18% 15% 11% 1% 3. Preliminary Land Use Concept Plans Land use pattems and relationships - three concepts offer different ideas. These should remain different to review with public in open house workshop in April. Once all comments are received, preferred option will be explored. Roadway patterns Open space systems 4. Vignettes - Parcel Studies Site testing to ensure correct/adequate parcel and block sizes to accommodate program Scale relationships and transitions between different uses studied Orientations of buildings Ensure adequate parking and open space needs are met. 5. Preliminary Site Sections Illustrate a sense of scale for proposed development on the site. Three large scale sections prepared across site from east to west, include existing grades and to scale building heights and masses. 6. Preliminary Street Sections Illustrate a hierarchy of road types and cross sectional design requirements. Sections included: a. Parkways b. CommerciaVretail streets c. Local residential streets 6 Meeting Minutes - TCAAP City CouncilPlanning Commission Worksession 7. Summary of Questions/Comments- Like the small amount of split retail at Highway 10. Prefer the high density residential in concept B. Like the view corridors at the ends of the roadways that provide views into the Kame area. Like the central open space strategy of concept B. Like the office park along Highway 96. Like the low density residential in concept B. Prefer to see some retail below higher density residential in some areas. Can there be a walkway or roadway along the National Guard fence along the east side ofthe site? Since those may be some of the more expensive single family lots, we may not want to put a pathway between the homes and the fence. Maybe better to handle with berming and landscape buffering. Provide deeper lots to accommodate this. A roadway along the fence would double up the infrastructure needed there and be more costly. Would the ponding in the central open space be crossed with bridges? The Vision Framework showed this. Maybe too many bridges shown on the Vision Framework. The ponds can be done without all bridge crossings. Like the open flow of the central park and open space in schemes A and B. Will the central open space be programmed with uses similar to Centennial Lakes in Edina? They may be progranuned but the design would likely be more naturalistic. Concepts A and B foster a good sense of neighborhood. Concept C fosters a better sense of neighborhood, maybe it's the curvy roads that might slow down traffic more? Like to see residential uses at Highway 96. Would like to see some open space and small amount of neighborhood commercial at Hwy 96. One of the concepts should indicate this idea. Can the civic program use be located at Highway 96? Maybe the civic use is better located near the higher density and retail uses to the north. How about a roundabout in concept B, near the high density residential? Like the retail near the high density residential on concept B Maybe the low density residential should touch portions of the open space on concept B? 7 Meeting Minutes - TCAAP City CouncilPianning Commission Worksession ~._~-. lanning Work Session Meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. / JvG ~~U19!1-r Michelle A. Wolfe City Administrator --.....::_" 8