This transcript appears to be from a **Richfield Planning Commission** meeting. Based on the context provided and the dialogue within the text, I have identified the speakers as the Planning Commission Chair, the City Planner (Sam Crosby), and several Commissioners. Note: While the prompt provided City Council names, Planning Commission members are often distinct. The transcript explicitly names Commissioners **Surma, Charlson, Hoie,** and **Holman**. *** **[00:00] Chair:** Minutes. First item on tonight's agenda is the approval of the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting that occurred March 25th, 2024. Do I have a motion for approval of the minutes? **[00:10] Commissioner Charlson:** So moved. **[00:12] Commissioner Surma:** Seconded. **[00:14] Chair:** Is there anything to discuss regarding the minutes? All in favor say aye. **[00:18] Commissioners:** Aye. **[00:20] Chair:** All opposed say nay. Minutes approved. We will now conduct an open forum, which is an opportunity for the public to address the Planning Commission regarding items not on our agenda. Call-in number for tonight's meeting is 415-655-0001; use webinar access code 2635-067-483 and password 234. If you are here in person, please sign in at the podium. If you're calling in remotely, staff will assist you when it's your turn to speak. Before speaking, please state your name, address, and the organization you represent, if any. Each person is allowed five minutes to speak, 10 if representing a group. Staff, are there any callers? **[00:55] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Chair, there are not. **[00:57] Chair:** Were there any emails or voice messages received? **[00:59] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Chair, there were not. **[01:01] Chair:** It appears there's no one here to address the Planning Commission during the open forum. Our next item is the approval of the agenda. Do we have a motion? **[01:08] Commissioner Surma:** Commissioner Surma moves to approve the agenda. **[01:10] Commissioner Charlson:** Second. **[01:12] Chair:** All in favor say aye. **[01:14] Commissioners:** Aye. **[01:16] Chair:** All opposed? The agenda is approved. Next on our agenda is the public hearing. First item as part of our public hearing is to continue a public hearing to consider a request by Partnership Academy to amend their planned unit development to extend the timeframe for complying with the parking agreement to May 29th, 2024. Staff, do you have a report? **[01:40] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. In 2018, the City approved a classroom expansion for Partnership Academy at 6500 Nicollet Avenue South. The project did not meet the parking requirements of the code; therefore, the approval included a condition that the property be brought into compliance with the minimum parking requirements within two years. The applicant filed for a time extension in late February, but the application was missing some key items and needed to be pushed from the March Planning Commission agenda to the April Planning Commission agenda. Due to complications in negotiating with Brixmor, the applicant has again requested that the request be delayed until May. Consequently, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing again for the request by Partnership Academy to amend their planned unit development to extend the timeframe for complying with the parking agreement until May 29th, which is a Wednesday—kind of pointing that out more for anybody that may be listening online than for the Commissioners; we usually meet on Mondays. May 29th, 2024. Thank you. **[02:45] Chair:** Thank you. Did anyone email or call in regarding this public hearing? **[02:49] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** No, I have not received anything. **[02:51] Chair:** All right. At this time, Commissioners, if you have any questions for staff, I invite you to raise them. **[02:56] Commissioner Surma:** I have one, Chair. Do we think that by the May deadline they'll be able to meet it, or is there other issues going on besides just the one that's holding up this month? **[03:08] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** I'm sorry, can you say it again? **[03:10] Commissioner Surma:** Well, I'm just—do you think that they'll be able to meet that May 29th deadline, or do you think there's going to be another push for another delay? **[03:18] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Oh, I indicated to them that we were interested in bringing the request forward either way by May. So they will—I expect that they will be before us one way or the other in May. **[03:32] Commissioner Surma:** Thank you. **[03:34] Chair:** Any other questions, Commissioners? At this time, if the applicant were in attendance, we would invite them to add comments here or we would be able to ask them questions, but they're not here tonight. Do we want to make a motion to continue the public hearing until May 29th as described in the report? **[03:52] Commissioner Surma:** So moved, Surma. **[03:54] Commissioner Charlson:** Thank you. Charlson, second. **[03:56] Chair:** All in favor? **[03:58] Commissioners:** Aye. **[04:00] Chair:** All opposed? Thank you. Approved. Our next agenda item is a public hearing and consideration of a resolution finding that the acquisition and disposition of 6525 Penn Avenue South by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority for multi-family housing is consistent with the Richfield Comprehensive Plan. Staff, do you have a report? **[04:22] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Yes, thank you, Chair and Commissioners. The property located at 6525 Penn Avenue South is in disrepair and has been vacant since 2020. Last year, the property became tax-forfeited, and the County has recently provided the City with the first opportunity for acquisition. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) purchased the adjacent property to the north of this site in 2018. Combining the two parcels would make for a larger, more viable site for redevelopment. At a joint workshop on April 15th, the HRA, City Council, and Planning Commission heard a proposal for an affordable housing project on the site with a concept plan that showed approximately 47 units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as mixed-use. Mixed-use allows for a mix of uses but does not require it, and a multi-family housing project of this size with or without a commercial component would comply with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designation. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the resolution before you this evening finding that the acquisition and disposition of 6525 Penn Avenue South by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority for multi-family housing is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Thank you. **[05:40] Chair:** Thank you. Did anyone call in or email regarding this item? **[05:44] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** No. **[05:46] Chair:** Thank you. Commissioners, at this time, do you have any questions for staff? **[05:51] Commissioner Surma:** Yeah, just clarifying what the HRA's timeline would be for acquiring the property if this were to go ahead. **[06:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** There is a deadline for acquiring the property until May 18th. I just found it. So, they are looking to act pretty quickly. **[06:12] Chair:** Yes, please, Commissioner Hoie. **[06:14] Commissioner Hoie:** With when the HRA acquires a property, do they need to have a plan in place, or do they propose like "this is going to be high-density residential" or "commercial"? I mean, does the planned use of the property matter in approving the HRA's purchase of the parcel, or are they two separate things? **[06:36] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** No, they are two separate things in that it may not come to pass that a specific proposal like that concept plan shown on April 15th will necessarily be the plan that is built. This is just saying that the general use of housing on the site is consistent, so it doesn't have to be a specific plan. **[06:58] Commissioner Hoie:** Sure. I guess I was just wondering why that—why even indicate what the planned use is for this. Is this just for context for deciding whether or not we want to approve it? **[07:10] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** If something came back where we wanted to do commercial or some other proposal came in, we would then have a new resolution that came before you. So this is just committing it to housing of some type. **[07:22] Commissioner Hoie:** Sure, okay. Great. **[07:24] Chair:** Thank you. Commissioner Charlson. **[07:26] Commissioner Charlson:** Has the HRA already voted on this, or are they waiting for our action to hear? **[07:31] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** They did vote on it in that their motion was contingent upon the action that happens here this evening. **[07:40] Commissioner Charlson:** Okay, so if we pass it, then it would go forward. Is that what you're saying? **[07:44] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** That is correct. **[07:46] Commissioner Charlson:** Okay, thank you. **[07:48] Chair:** Commissioners, are there any other questions? As there's no one here for the public hearing and there's no calls, I'll call for a motion to close the public hearing. **[07:58] Commissioner Hoie:** Commissioner Hoie motions we close the public hearing. **[08:02] Commissioner Charlson:** Seconded by Charlson. **[08:04] Chair:** All in favor say aye. **[08:06] Commissioners:** Aye. **[08:08] Chair:** All opposed? All right, the public hearing is closed. Commissioners, do you have any additional comments for further discussion regarding 6525 Penn? **[08:18] Commissioner Hoie:** I do, Chair. I just think this is a good proposal. we desperately need more affordable housing, and I think Richfield in particular has a hard—we don't have a lot of extra housing or anything around. So I think that this is a good use of the site, especially since it's in disrepair right now. That's my thought on it. **[08:38] Chair:** Thank you, Commissioner. **[08:40] Commissioner Surma:** Yeah, I was impressed by the proposal, the work. I thought it was really considerate of the neighborhood—both the Penn Avenue business district as well as what's going on in the neighborhood and stuff. So, I think it's a great addition. I hope that that plan makes its way to actually happening. **[09:00] Chair:** Thank you. Please... **[09:02] Commissioner Charlson:** Yeah, I too was encouraged to see the proposal that was put forth last week. Of course, keep in mind any final proposal will still have to go through the City permitting and eventually come through us before anything actually comes to fruition. So I guess what we're voting on here tonight is really just the principle behind the redevelopment proposal—not the proposal itself, but more just the general direction the HRA is thinking of going. But I'm in support of this general direction. **[09:36] Chair:** Thank you. Commissioner Holman? **[09:38] Commissioner Holman:** I have a question. Is there—assuming that this gets passed and the developer is able to move forward with the construction—is there any sort of feedback taken from residential neighbors on that, or is it kind of just... for me or for staff? **[09:54] Chair:** For staff. **[09:56] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** I'm sorry, for some reason I'm having a hard time hearing tonight. Can you repeat your question again? **[10:00] Commissioner Holman:** Is there any type of feedback gathering for neighbors of the site that happens before construction begins? **[10:06] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Oh gosh, yes. So, it was a concept plan that was presented at the workshop where the HRA would basically agree to hold the site for this developer to allow them to go for funding to see if they can get enough financials together to then submit a formal application. When that formal application comes in, it would need to go back to the HRA again, which would have public hearings, and it would come to us as a land use application where we'd see the full packet for development, and that would be a public hearing as well. Knowing this developer, they would probably have a neighborhood meeting as well. So yes, this is very early on in the process. It's really just to say—first of all, it's primarily for acquiring the site. It just so happened that this developer came in at the same time that we're looking to acquire the site. These two things don't usually happen simultaneously like they are right now. And I did want to point out one thing: this is under "Other Business." It doesn't technically require a public hearing. It doesn't hurt that you opened it and just made sure that there was nobody interested in speaking, but you don't have to have a public hearing for the finding of consistency. **[11:24] Chair:** Thank you for pointing that out. I appreciate that; I was trying to be overprepared. Like I said, doesn't hurt. I believe we've all asked a question. Do we have any more? Are we ready to entertain a motion on this item? **[11:38] Commissioner Surma:** Commissioner Surma. I move to approve the resolution proposed about 6525 Penn Avenue South finding the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. **[11:50] Commissioner Charlson:** Charlson, seconded. **[11:52] Chair:** All in favor say aye. **[11:54] Commissioners:** Aye. **[11:56] Chair:** All opposed? I should have said aye as well, I was busy talking. The motion carries. The item is approved. Next on our agenda... I apologize, under Other Business, one more item here. Consideration of a resolution finding that the acquisition of 1620 78th Street East by the HRA is consistent with the Richfield Comprehensive Plan. **[12:20] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. The property located at 1620 78th Street has been vacant since 2022. The adjacent parcels on either side are both owned by the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The property owner of the subject site originally wanted to work collaboratively with the HRA to redevelop all three parcels together; however, the development economy has been slow in recent years and the owner has decided to donate the two-acre parcel to the HRA. Combined, these parcels create one of the last remaining redevelopment sites, a total of 3.7 acres along the I-494 corridor. This HRA acquisition requires that the Planning Commission consider whether or not the action is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Regional Commercial. This designation is intended for larger-scale uses that attract users from throughout the Twin Cities. As such, staff finds that the acquisition of the property for future redevelopment complies with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designation and recommends approval of the resolution before you this evening stating such. Thank you. **[13:30] Chair:** Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions? **[13:34] Commissioner Surma:** Commissioner. Is this the site that we previously had a conversation about the Velodrome on? **[13:42] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** It is. **[13:44] Commissioner Surma:** Okay. And has there been any other interest from any other parties about this site, or historically has anything else come forward? **[13:52] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Not that I'm aware of, no. **[13:54] Chair:** Any other questions or further comments about this item? Are we ready to entertain a motion here? **[13:58] Commissioner Charlson:** I move to approve the recommendation here. **[14:02] Commissioner Holman:** Second. **[14:04] Chair:** All in favor say aye. **[14:06] Commissioners:** Aye. **[14:08] Chair:** All opposed? Motion carries. And that brings us to our Liaison Reports. First up is our Community Services Advisory Commission. **[14:16] Commissioner Holman:** Okay, so the Wood Lake building project is making progress. They have an RFP out for a construction manager, and they're also working on Donaldson Park. They applied for a grant for playground equipment and are also seeking feedback and design ideas for the new Donaldson building, where they'll also be applying for a Hennepin County facilities grant. City Council liaison is Chair Ed, and he is out this evening. **[14:44] Chair:** Do we have an HRA report? Maybe that's Commissioner... **[14:48] Commissioner Hoie:** I have no report on the Richfield School Board. **[14:52] Chair:** Next up is Transportation Commission. **[14:54] Commissioner Charlson:** Yes. So, the Transportation Commission had a presentation from Public Works giving an overview of the recent completion of the city's, I think, six or seven-year-long mill and overlay program, in which nearly all the residential streets in Richfield were repaved in a staggered system. They talked about the future of how the city will monitor pavement conditions and plan repavement and road maintenance going forward. They also discussed the continuing outreach and preliminary design process that Hennepin County is conducting along Nicollet Avenue for the planned reconstruction in two years' time. **[15:38] Chair:** Chamber of Commerce? **[15:40] Commissioner Surma:** I do not have a report. **[15:42] Chair:** Sustainability Commission? **[15:44] Commissioner Holman:** I do not have a report either; the minutes haven't been posted yet. **[15:48] Chair:** Thank you. City Planner's report? **[15:50] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. At the April 9th City Council meeting, the Council approved a request for the PUD amendment for the time extension—the amendment to the construction agreement for the multi-story parking ramp at 1401 77th Street, which is the Audi Richfield item that we heard last month. Thank you. **[16:12] Chair:** Our next meeting time and location will be Wednesday, May 29th, at 7:00 PM here in City Council Chambers. With that, we are able to adjourn. **[16:22] Commissioner Surma:** Commissioner Surma moves to adjourn. **[16:24] Commissioner Charlson:** Charlson, seconds. **[16:26] Chair:** All in favor say aye. **[16:28] Commissioners:** Aye.