Signature Development Task Force Agenda
November 21, 2013 – Meeting #9
6:30 – 9:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, Brooklyn Park City Hall
5200 85th Avenue
Present
Members: Kelly Janssen, Mike Trepanier, Tonja West-Hafner, Anthony Spears, Mark McNamer, Michael
Kisch, Kathy Fraser, Mark Wendt, Shalin Johnson
Staff: Cindy Sherman, Amy Baldwin, Todd Larson, Kim Berggren, Jake Rosenberg
Public: Bren Buckley
Welcome
Updates
 Metropolitan Council
o Governor appointed regional planning agency
o Responsible for parks/trails, sewer, transit, and land use
o 10 year comprehensive plan updates submitted to Met Council for approval after
comment period
o Comprehensive plans support functions of Met Council
o Lana Schreiber represents Brooklyn Park and other municipalities in the district and
works with Met Council staff
o Makes spending recommendations and disburses federal funds
 Drafting Recommendations Process
Recap of Design Insights
 What jumps out to you?
o Signature building
o Consistency, good marketing
o Committing to a process for consistency
o Focus on 610 corridor
 What resonates?
o Design matters!!
o Embedding consistency
o Could lead the Planning Commission to apply stronger design recommendations
 Concerns
o Does the City want to dictate color palettes? No, the City should stick to principles

o How do you enforce design principles?
What else?
o Functionality for people? Explain more about those principles like scale, focal points,
etc.
o How strong will the City be enforcing design
o Put the vision forward
o Be clear about expectations with developers upfront
o Empower Staff with a vision co we can have this upfront conversation with developersfind compromise
o Remember that some developers bring in the architectural C-Team so the City should
have higher expectations
o Emphasize quality design
o Change vision statement to “Design Matters!”
Review Design Recommendations
 Discussion on wording of recommendations and implementation measures
 Understanding principles v. guidelines
 Clarifying questions
 Recommendation rewrites
 Concern with the use of the word “subsidize”- too many negative connotations
 Consensus on the following language for recommendations and implementation measures:
Rely on design principles to create a distinct identity and promote a stable financial future for
Brooklyn Park.
Develop Brooklyn Park specific design principles to guide the development review
process.
Promote exceptional design and signature buildings along the TH 610 corridor.
Encourage efficient use of land through structured parking.
Develop guidelines for the City’s participation to encourage structured parking at key
development sites showing a clear long term benefit to the community.
Map Exercise
Map Exercise Group Reporting
 Reactions
o Mixed types of buildings
o Realized the impact of height on tax value
o Stayed in the 4-6 story range which felt realistic for the area
o Liked having green space a theme and entryway to what might be a more town square
style Target area
o Trail to green space connections
o Surprised on the amount of commercial/multifamily/office development that will fit
compared to single family homes
o Tried to balance density of housing with retail so housing can support retail uses
 Concerns
o Had to change thought process because of the location of McDonalds. Demonstrated
how crucial a vision is because one development can throw off the plans for an area
 What was good?
o Impressed with the tax calculation numbers
o Great understanding of scale; what can go there; will it fit?
o Parking takes a lot of space!

o If put in different context, developments would fit a lot differently
Takeaways
o 50-80 million tax value
o 4-6 story scale could fit in this location
o Will likely not be high rise
o Creating a good transition from 169-610 area
o Would like to use the Centennial lake green space and amphitheater idea
Wrap up
 What stands out?
o Enclosed parking is key and has a huge impact
o High densities increase tax base
o Too many development options
o Parks and entertainment need to be incorporated
o Needs to be different from Target, yet still compatible and complimentary
 Likes
o Fun exercise
o Enjoyed discussion synergies between uses
 What is important?
o Visioning
o Importance of high quality development
o Getting in conversations about and working on recommendations
 Takeaways
o Still a lot to do
o Vision
o Creativity
o Variety
o Complimentary design and land use
9:55pm Adjourn
Next Meeting - Thursday, December 19, 2013 @ Lampi Room, City Hall, 6:00 – 9:00 pm