Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-04-19 City Council Work SessonAgenda City Council Work Session City of Edina, Minnesota Edina City Hall Community Room Tuesday, April 19, 2016 6:15 PM I.Call To Order II.Roll Call III.Grandview Facility Site Fit IV.Adjournment The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing ampli$cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: April 19, 2016 Agenda Item #: III. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Reports / Recommendation From:Ann Kattreh, Parks & Recreation Director Item Activity: Subject:Grandview Facility Site Fit Discussion, Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Provide Review and Comment on the preliminary architectural plans and site fit. INTRODUCTION: HGA will present an updated site fit architectural model for City Council to review. ATTACHMENTS: Description March 10 Open House Report Grandview Site Fit Options 1 & 2 Park Board and Arts & Culture Commission Meeting Notes Grandview Site Fit Staff Report Preferred Option Presentation = PROJECT: Edina Grandview Community Center HGA Commission Number 3857-001-00 FROM: Michael Anderson WRITER’S DIRECT DIAL 612-758-4353 DATE: April 4, 2016 MEETING Purpose: Community Open House - Resident Comments Date: March 10, 2016 Time: 7:00 p.m. Location: City of Edina Public Works Comments on Boards  How about serpentine walk up to Eden Ave?  Possible two entries for underground parking?  Nice to see performance space  Would prefer building on south side of lot  Access from ramp or street to “Adult” (Active) is a long walk; elevators should be closer  Like the elevation on option 1 the best; like the location of the art center on the north  Would like to see health & fitness as a revenue generator  Prefer option 1 (smoother)  Would like to see an entry to the ramp with separate exit; one in/out entry will be congested on event nights  Elevators should be located near “Active Adult” area from ramp  How does it compare to current Art Center ____  Too expensive  Art Center is ____ Questions/Comments from Edina Attendees  How will present and future freight train traffic along western edge of site impact the project site? Will freight train traffic increase? Will trains carry hazardous materials such as oil? o HGA Response: While there are building mitigation strategies for train noise and vibration, analysis of train traffic capacity or impact on building programming is not part of current design scope.  The project costs are too expensive. o HGA Response: Point will be noted in meeting minutes.  What is the cause of the difference in operating cost projections between the preferred option and larger options? o HGA Response: The inclusion of comprehensive fitness programming in larger building options helps to drive membership and revenue. Edina Grandview Community Center April 4, 2016 Page 2  Prior design work oriented community center main façade to the north fronting onto proposed shared street. There is a concern that current designs have changed this orientation. o HGA Response: Orientation of main entrance and public façade was changed toward east due to ongoing developments in urban planning of adjacent properties. Properties to the north have stated that renovation/reconstruction of retail development will likely not occur on next ten years. Currently, a north façade of the proposed community center would face onto the rear service yards of retail businesses. It is recommended that the main entrance and public façade face toward Arcadia as an existing public way under the control of the City of Edina. Unless limited by site constraints, seeking to enter buildings in northern climates from a favorable solar orientation is recommended.  Several attendees expressed support for shifting the proposed community center development to the south side of the site. o HGA Response: City leaders have not made any decisions regarding specific site location. The comments will be carried forward to City staff and council. 12 April 2016 ED I N A G R A N D V I E W C O M M U N I T Y C E N T E R PA R K B O A R D A N D A R T S & C U L T U R E COMMISSION MEETING The CITY of EDINA PARK BOARD AND ARTS & CULTURE COMMISSION 12 April 2016 2 PR O G R A M O P T I O N S U M M A R Y CA P I T A L + O P E R A T I N G C O S T The CITY of EDINA PARK BOARD AND ARTS & CULTURE COMMISSION 12 April 2016 3 CA P I T O L C O S T – P R O G R A M O P T I O N B CO R E P R O G R A M S + E V E N T 4 SI T E F I T | OP T I O N 1 EA S T A E R I A L EA S T P E R S P E C T I V E SO U T H E A S T A E R I A L 11 SI T E F I T | OP T I O N 2 SO U T H E A S T A E R I A L EA S T P E R S P E C T I V E SO U T H E A S T P E R S P E C T I V E The CITY of EDINA PARK BOARD AND ARTS & CULTURE COMMISSION 12 April 2016 19 TH A N K Y O U . PROJECT: Edina Grandview Community Center HGA Commission Number 3857-001-00 FROM: Victor Pechaty WRITER’S DIRECT DIAL 612-758-4353 DATE: April 13, 2016 MEETING Purpose: Task Force Design Review Comments Date: April 12, 2016 Time: 7:00 PM Location: Braemar Golf Course Clubhouse 1. HGA presented two design options, each based on program option “B” as directed by City Council at the February 17 City Council Workshop. Option B programs include: Art Center, Active Adult Programs (currently known as Senior Center), Commons and Flexible Meeting Rooms, Fitness/Wellness Studios, Café, and an Event Center. a. Option 1 is a two-story building option wrapping an east facing courtyard. Commons areas are located in the center of all programs with active adults and event center to the south of the commons and art center to the north. b. Option 2 is a three-story option with active adult on level one, commons, art, wellness on level two, and art and event center on level three. 2. Option 1 was preferred by the majority of Park Board and Arts & Culture Commission members for the following reasons: a. Better overall internal flow between programs b. Better program adjacencies and connections – the multi-purpose programs are more proximate to each other thus encouraging overlap and collaboration among different programs. Opportunities noted were: joint programming of active adults and wellness, active adults and arts, arts and wellness. Option 1 creates a programmatic “conversation” between the various programs located in the facility. c. Central location of commons and café: Option 1 situates these programs at the center of the facility thus creating a programmatic heart to the building. All program users would pass through and interact with the commons areas en route to various programs within the building d. The building entrance from grade and from parking below both arrive into the same location adjacent to the commons. All patrons will experience the same arrival sequence. e. The central commons is more compact and centralizes vs. the elongated commons in Option 2. 3. The Option 2 event space location received positive feedback regarding potential for views of downtown Minneapolis to the northeast. It was noted that the building design should capitalize on the elevation/height of the site. 4. Site circulation was a concern in the following areas: Edina Grandview Community Center April 4, 2016 Page 2 a. Senior Access: Both options indicate a significant exterior walking distance from curbside drop-off into the building. This does not work well for seniors. Design team to provide solution for safe, convenient, and proximate access into the building for senior drop-off. Consider Metro Mobility drop-off. b. General Access: Curbside drop-off to provide safe, proximate access into building. Consider access from multiple traffic modes: vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian. Provide safe and intuitive access for all c. Consider ease of access and way finding from below-grade parking into building commons. Consider potential drop-off zone within parking structure 5. The building roof forms and elevation provide opportunity for rooftop programming. Design team to study opportunity for rooftop terrace and/or green roof. 6. There is concern about the inclusion of children’s and youth programming in the facility. Organizations providing programming within the facility should foreground the consideration of children’s and youth programming to attract all generations to the facility. 7. Students expressed concern about lack of attraction for youth and students. The program and design should consider youth oriented gathering and study areas. A coffee shop atmosphere was noted as inviting and heavily used by students. Ample integration of technology through wi-fi, monitors, charging stations, etc. would help create a youth- oriented study/hang-out atmosphere. 8. A concern was stated that the facility does not fell like an integrated “community center”. Rather, it feels like an aggregation of art center, active adult center, and event center. Responses included a stated urgent need for replacement of the existing art center which, due to size limitations and deteriorating facilities can no longer serve its mission and desired programming. Care should be taken to integrate building programming so it does not function as three distinct programs sharing a facility. 9. Wellness spaces should be fitted to serve wellness activities: yoga, aerobics, etc. – not meeting room finishes. Meeting facilities can/will occur in other building programs. 10. Site programming should consider outdoor seating and programming 11. Several comment suggested that a community facility may be better sited at the south end of the Grandview site for the following reasons: a. Better access to light and views toward southern open space. b. Given the flat grade along Eden Ave (vs. the sloping grade along Arcadia), the south side would provide more accessible access points for all patrons of the community facility. c. Locating housing toward the north will facilitate better pedestrian connections between a housing development and adjacent retail, grocery, and neighborhood services. d. Frontage along both Eden and Arcadia could provide for better/flexible traffic access for events and programming at community facility. The community facility will have greater traffic access/movement than a housing development. 12. The east orientation and similar material palette to City Hall is seen as positive. It begins to suggest a “civic campus” and connection among city facilities. 13. Concern was raised about traffic congestion along north drive. Currently, there is congestion in this area and the temporary parking stalls serving the art center may exacerbate this condition. HGA will share this input with LHB for on-going study/integration in neighborhood traffic analysis. April 19, 2016 Mayor and City Council Ann Kattreh Parks & Recreation Director Grandview Facility Site Fit Information / Background: The Grandview Operational and Feasibility Study is progressing according to schedule. At the Feb. 17, 2016 City Council Work Session, the City Council provided direction to the task force to continue to work on and refine Option B, the Core (Active Adult, Art, Cafe) and Event Venue. With that direction, HGA has prepared two design options for how this facility could fit onto the Grandview site with these components. Options 1 and 2 are included in the attached presentation document. Staff continues to work with Pros Consulting and Sutton & Associates to refine the program and pro forma for the facility; however, the focus of this presentation and meeting discussion is on the architecture and layout of the facility and how it best works on the site and in the surrounding area. At the April 12 joint meeting of the Park Board and Arts & Culture Commission, HGA made a presentation for two site fit options for a community facility at Grandview. These options were also presented to the task force on March 10 and also to an open house on March 10. Feedback from these meetings will be utilized to create one option which will be presented to the City Council at the April 19 City Council Work Session. HGA will make further refinements pending City Council feedback. Feedback from the previous meetings is attached as is the presentation that HGA made to the Park Board and Arts & Culture Commission on April 12. Summary notes from the Park Board and Arts & Culture Commission meeting are attached. Between April 13 and April 18, HGA is working diligently, based on all feedback received to date, to revise architectural drawings to present one option for the City Council to review. The Park Board and Arts & Culture Commission provided the following review and comments: Park Board Member Michael Miller likes Option 1. He likes the commons/center of the building is the heart and activities are gathered around it. Option 2 is very compartmentalized with different floors and different wings. It doesn’t have a heart STAFF REPORT Page 2 or center of the building. He doesn’t like option 2 compartmentalization. Both provide big enough courtyard except for the mobility access. Park Board Member Koren Nelson likes the third level on Option 2 and is concerned about views from the pre-event gathering area. Being on the hill provides a nice view looking down at OLG. Welcome view. Her biggest concern is proximity of which activities and spaces are put adjacent to one another. Arts & Culture Commission Member Kandace Ellis expressed concern over the extensive walk from a street drop-off and asked if there could be a drop-off area in the underground parking garage. Arts & Culture Commission Member Barbara LaValleur indicated she is very visual and likes Option 1. She believes that it seems more functional and there seems to be a better flow and interaction in the flow of the rooms where there could be more interaction as opposed to the three stories Option 2. She is very interested in a nice view for sure but when she goes to the Art Center and Senior Center she is not looking out the window but doing what she is doing at the time. She liked the idea of having a space outside with tables and charging stations. Arts & Culture Commission Member Cheryl Gunness stated that relative to view, one nice feature on north side in Option 2 provides the highest view that could be captured from that spot. She strongly prefers Option 1 because it seems to her the real potential of a community center with putting an art program thriving in the center. Park Board Member Greg Good asked if there would be an opportunity to add a rooftop deck. He also mentioned taking care to make sure that people have safe ways to cross streets because the parking ramp would likely be utilized by people going to other businesses in the area. He likes Option 1 and likes the centralized feel and flow with the building and with the outdoor area. He stated that if we are going to do a fitness area that we should do it and make sure that the spaces are not too multi- purpose. Park Board Member Dan Gieseke like the idea of having a rooftop garden. He likes the sense of community center that Option 1 provides. He mentioned that he doesn’t think that the facility is very “youth friendly”. He likes the material used in the building exterior and wants to make sure that it matches up well with City Hall. STAFF REPORT Page 3 Park Board Chair Brenda McCormick stated that to her it doesn’t feel like a community center. One concern about the project is that it doesn’t feel like it’s bringing the community together. She does like Option 1 with the flow, but both options look good. Arts & Culture Commission Chair Ann Miller stated that the Arts & Culture Commission consensus is we need a new art center and that we have outgrown our existing facility. Park Board Student Member Lauren Crist didn’t really see anything that would be a great draw for youth. She would like to see a room where kids could study with screens, big tables and more of an open feel for people to congregate. Park Board Student Member Aanik Lohani leans to Option 1. He feels that the programs were nicely situated around the building and felt it became more of an interactive space of the community. He likes the idea of not typical meeting rooms, but more electronically enhanced rooms for kids to hook up their gadgets. Park Board Member Eileen McAwley likes Option 1. She sees tutors with kids at Starbucks and thinks it’s a great idea to look at incorporating studying and gathering into the space there. Park Board Member Matt Dahlien commented on his concern for the facility fit with the residential component. He is also concerned about handicap access. He is concerned about the elevation changes on the site. He also stated that he loved the art center kilns when he was a kid and he wants to make sure we allot enough space for all of the Art Center amenities. Arts & Culture Commission Member Stella Chaffee also prefers Option 1. She is concerned about drop-off zones and safety and would consider a larger drop-off area in exchange for the courtyard. The general consensus of both the Park Board and the Arts & Culture Commission was a preference for Option 1, with some suggestions for improvements and for consideration and also some popular components of Option 2 to consider melding into Option 1. Staff and the task force will continue to work on the program and pro formas and will make a final presentation for review and comment to the Park Board on May 10, just one week prior to the City Council final presentation on May 17. 19 April 2016 ED I N A G R A N D V I E W C O M M U N I T Y C E N T E R CI T Y C O U N C I L P R E S E N T A T I O N The CITY of EDINA CITY COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19 April 2016 2 PR O G R A M O P T I O N S U M M A R Y CA P I T A L + O P E R A T I N G C O S T SE L E C T E D OP T I O N The CITY of EDINA CITY COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19 April 2016 3 CA P I T O L C O S T – P R O G R A M O P T I O N B CO R E P R O G R A M S + E V E N T 4 SI T E & B U I L D I N G | OP T I O N 1 7 SI T E & B U I L D I N G | OP T I O N 2 10 SI T E & B U I L D I N G | PR E F E R R E D O P T I O N EA S T A E R I A L EA S T P E R S P E C T I V E SO U T H E A S T A E R I A L The CITY of EDINA CITY COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19 April 2016 17 TH A N K Y O U .