Capitol Area Architectural and Planning Board and Attachments with...Graphic Development Phase: creating a final document, in the 11x11 format with supporting graphics 3. Review and

1

Date: April 23, 2019 To: Comprehensive Plan Committee From: Peter Musty, Principal Planner (CAAPB) Linda Spohr, Planner (CAAPB)

RE: 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Update and Next Steps Thank you for the work you put into the review and approval process for Chapter 7a and the guidance you have provided, and continue to provide, in development of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.

As staff, we are now setting down 7a and moving our attention back to chapters 1-7, the Capitol Area-wide principles, and the chapters that will hold the bulk of our policy. We have defined a development process for each chapter and identified the planning work we expect to be needed to update the policy for each chapter.

In Lieu of Meeting in April, Action is Requested of Comprehensive Plan Committee: We ask that you please take 20-30 minutes to read and review the following attachments, and provide comment, questions or ideas no later than May 1. Based on your comments, we will either modify our approach or we may pull you together so you can provide direction in person. If you need more time for this review, please let us know. Thank you!

Attachments:

A. Chapter Review and Adoption process We have defined a development process for each chapter (each Principle). The general approach is outlined in Attachment A.

B. Draft Table of Contents for Each Chapter (updated 5/15 per committee comments) We are well into the process of defining the content that each chapter will cover. This process helped us determine what planning was needed. Attachment D is our first draft of the Table of Contents for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.

C. Planning Tracks and Studies (updated 5/15 per committee comments) In order to develop the content for each Principle, we have identified 10 planning initiatives. Three you know about: Capitol Rice Planning is complete; Capitol Area Commutes and Capitol Connections are underway. We have added seven additional planning initiatives. All are outlined in Appendix B.

D. Public Agency Technical Resources: Request for Collaboration and Information This is a list of professional staff receiving inter-agency requests for collaboration and information.

E. Updated Comp Plan Timeline

Capitol Area Architectural and Planning Board

204 Administration Building 50 Sherburne Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 Phone: 651.757.1500 Web: www.mn.gov/CAAPB TTY: 800.627.3529

Comprehensive Plan Committee Update pg 1 of 3 Attachment A

Attachment A. Chapter Review and Adoption Process

We have defined a development process for each chapter (each Principle). The general approach is outlined

below. Some chapters will be developed concurrently.

1. Chapter-by-Chapter Development Phase: policy and descriptive text

2. Graphic Development Phase: creating a final document, in the 11x11 format with supporting graphics

3. Review and Approval Phase: submission to required stakeholders for 90-day review, required by statute.

The rest of this attachment will outline our estimated timeline and development approach in more detail.

1. Chapter-by-Chapter Development Phase (Policy and Supporting Text - 7 Chapters)

Our general approach will be to first develop the policy and supporting text. This will be done chapter-by-chapter

and will be accompanied by planning and stakeholder engagement specific to each chapter. During this Chapter

Development Phase, graphic work will be limited to that which is necessary to communicate policy content. In

some places, only reference to a future graphic will be made. This is very similar to the process we went through

with Chapter 7A.

For each of the seven chapters we are planning a two-draft planning and review process that will look roughly

like this:

v1 – PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED POLICY – COMPLETE!

The first version of every chapter is a simple compilation of unedited existing policy and supporting text

distributed in the proposed chapter structure. (See proposed chapter structure in Attachment B.) We have

completed this step, bringing to completion an 18-month process of reviewing existing policy and culling relevant

material from over 40 documents. We have created draft outlines of each chapter and allocated all of the existing

content to the appropriate sections. This raw material (unedited) will serve as very rough foundational first drafts

of each chapter. These drafts are available for review in our office, but will not be published online.

v2.x – PLANNING DRAFT(S)

The second version of every chapter will be updates to the existing policy based on planning work. Depending on

the chapter content, we have various planning “tracks” we will follow. (See descriptions of these planning efforts

in Attachment C.) Planning and writing is an iterative processes. Some chapters need more planning and review

than others; therefore, we can expect some chapters will have multiple planning drafts: v2.1, v2.2, etc. A “v2”

(version 2) indicator, though, denotes this chapter is in the updating-policy-still-in-review stage of development.

The Planning Draft will focus on policy text and supporting intro/descriptive text; minimal time will be spent on

graphic design.

The final step in this phase of development is presentation to the CAAPB. The final version 2 of each chapter will

be presented to the Board for review and preliminary approval.


Estimated Timeline for v2.x Planning Drafts of each chapter (some concurrent):

2-5 months: planning, writing and interim reviews. (Exact timeline will differ by chapter. Planning and

Stakeholder list will differ by chapter. See following pages.)

Final v2.x Complete and sent to CAAPB and major stakeholders

Ten days (minimum): Board review period

Board Meeting; comment period closed

One week (estimate): final edits made to chapter as needed. File name is appended with text

“BOARD_APPROVED”

2. Graphic Design Phase (full 2040 Comprehensive Plan)

While each chapter will have some formatting (maps, graphics, etc.) throughout the v2.x process, most of the

graphic design will happen after content approval. Approved chapters (planning draft 2.x) will be compiled and

imported into the 11x11 format. This will give us our first view of the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. During

this phase we will focus on formatting the document and communicating the content visually by creating

additional graphics (plans, street sections, info graphics, photography, etc.) as may be required. We will also be

soliciting feedback on the full plan from various stakeholders; though we do not expect extensive edits to the

content at this point since each chapter would have been approved previously.

Estimated Timeline for Graphic Design of Full 2040 Comprehensive Plan:

3-4 weeks: Chapter import and development of full 2040 Comprehensive Plan

The final version of each chapter (Chapter_v2.x_BOARD_APPROVED) will be imported into InDesign and

compiled. This will give us our first view of the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. At this time we will

determine what graphics are still needed to communicate the Comprehensive Plan policy. This version is the

baseline of approved content.

12 weeks (estimate)*: Graphics development and interim stakeholder reviews (TBD)

*This is a rough estimate until we better understand the extent of graphic development needed for the final

comprehensive plan.

PLANNING/WRITING/STAKEHOLDER REVIEWS Chapter v2.x (2-5 months)

BOARD

REVIEW

(10 days)

FINAL

EDITS

(1 week)

Submit final v2.x to CAAPB and Stakeholders

CAAPB Board

Meeting

Chapter v2.x_Approved Import to InDesign (3-4 weeks)

Development of Graphics; Stakeholder Reviews; Finalize Document (estimate 12 weeks)


3. Final Review and Approval Phase (full 2040 Comprehensive Plan)

When graphic design is complete we move into the Review and Approval Phase. The Comprehensive Plan will be

submitted to the Board, the City of Saint Paul Planning Department, the State Arts Board and other key

stakeholders for final review. The review period is 90-days, required by statute.

Estimated Timeline for Review and Approval Phase:

Submit Draft 2040 Full Comprehensive Plan to Board, City of Saint Paul Planning Department, State Arts Board

and key stakeholders

90 days (minimum): Review and Comment Period

Per MN Statute 15B, a 90-day comment period is required for review by the City of Saint Paul Planning

Department and the State Arts Board. This must be followed by a public hearing.

2 weeks: Incorporate Edits

Submit Final 2040 Comprehensive Plan to Board for approval

10 days: Final Board Review Period

Board Meeting / Public Hearing

Approval of document, or approval with outlined changes expected at this meeting.

Publish and Print

EDITS

(2 weeks)

Submit 2040 Comprehensive Plan to

CAAPB and Stakeholders

CAAPB Board

Meeting APPROVAL

REVIEW PERIOD (90 days)

Submit 2040 Comprehensive Plan

to CAAPB

BOARD

REVIEW

(10 days)

Comprehensive Plan Committee Update pg 1 of 2 Attachment B

Attachment B: (updated 5/15 per committee comments) 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the Capitol Area Table of Contents (Draft) Introduction Statutory Authority Principal Influences on the Plan Planning Process Organization of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan The Capitol Area Principles Principle 1: As Minnesota’s seat of government and destination for thousands each year, the Capitol Area offers the highest quality experience to visitors. Introduction The Civic Role of Capitol Area in Minnesota Minnesota’s Seat of Government Minnesota’s Front Yard The Heart and Identity of Minnesota’s Capitol City Ensuring the Highest Quality Visitor Experience How Visitors Arrive Mobility, Parking and Wayfinding Information Comfort and Safety Principle 2: The Capitol Building and Mall is central to the identity of Saint Paul and serves as a dominant and unifying focal point of the city, as Cass Gilbert once envisioned. Introduction The Preeminence of the Capitol Building Height Views The Campus Plan Capitol Building Plan Buildings: Spatial Hierarchy Architectural Excellence Buildings Landscapes Intentional Relationships to the City Fabric and River Urban Campus Open Arms Downtown/River Connection Neighborhood Connection Principle 3: The entire Capitol Area provides an integrated, high-quality, human-scale public realm experience. Introduction Parks Streetscapes Sub-topics to include: lighting, paving, seating, vegetation, accessibility, safety, equity Building Frontages Active Ground Level Art in the Public Realm Principle 4: The Capitol Area is an urban multi-modal district, seamlessly connected to destinations. General Mobility/Introduction Mode Split Mobility Hub Mobility and Parking Planning Multi-Modal Street Network Pedestrian Bicycle Transit Vehicles and Parking

Comprehensive Plan Committee Update pg 2 of 2 Attachment B

Principle 5: The Capitol Area is a model workplace, employing best practices in service to the public. Introduction How will the State compete for workers in the coming decades? Access and Security Sustainability Buildings: multi-use and reuse Buildings: energy, water and waste Open Spaces/Public Realm: green infrastructure Sustainability-related demonstration projects in the Capitol Area State Workforce Mobility Objectives Mode Split Goals Support for Transportation Coordinator Call for Transit Amenities and a Mobility Hub Principle 6: Land use diversity is encouraged throughout the Capitol Area. Introduction Future Land Use Mix and Patterns Urban Campus Set Between Neighborhoods and Downtown Transit Oriented Development / Urban Village Existing Commercial Goods and Services Neighborhood Nodes Residential Development and Missing Middle Housing Existing Residential Choices in the Capitol Area Guidance for Regulation Principle 7: In all parts of the Capitol Area, new development respects community, assets and context. Introduction Capitol Area Districts and Neighborhoods How is Planning Done in the Capitol Area Comprehensive Planning District and Neighborhood Planning New Developments Preservation Historic Structures Historic Districts Heritage and Cultural Preservation Introduction to Sub-Chapters A, B and C Principle 7A: The Capitol Rice District is an Urban Village with Leif Erickson Park at its center. Community Assets and Context of the Capitol Rice District The Basis for the Capitol Rice Development Framework Introduction to The Capitol Rice Development Framework Principle 7B: New development in Capitol Heights should be sensitive to the existing scale and character. Contents TBD Principle 7C: [Fitzgerald Park …] Contents TBD Principle 7D: The connection between the Capitol Area and Downtown Saint Paul and the Mississippi River should be restored. Contents TBD

Comprehensive Plan Committee Update pg 1 of 12 Attachment C

Attachment C: Planning Tracks and Studies (updated 5/15 per committee comments)

Why Are We Doing Planning? To support The Capitol Area Principles:

Principle 1: As Minnesota’s seat of government and destination for thousands each year, the Capitol Area offers the highest quality experience to visitors.

Principle 2: The Capitol Building and Mall is central to the identity of Saint Paul and serves as a dominant and unifying focal point of the city, as Cass Gilbert once envisioned.

Principle 3: The entire Capitol Area provides an integrated, high-quality, human-scale public realm experience.

Principle 4: The Capitol Area is an urban multi-modal district, seamlessly connected to destinations.

Principle 5: The Capitol Area is a model workplace, employing best practices in service to the public.

Principle 6: Land use diversity is encouraged throughout the Capitol Area.

Principle 7: In all parts of the Capitol Area, new development respects community, assets and context.

Principle 7A: The Capitol Rice District is an Urban Village with Leif Erickson Park at its center.

Principle 7B: New development in Capitol Heights should be sensitive to the existing scale and character.

Principle 7C: [Fitzgerald Park …]

Principle 7D: The connection between the Capitol Area and Downtown Saint Paul and the Mississippi River should be restored.

Planning Tracks and Studies Principles Supported by Planning Initiative 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7A 7B 7C 7D

Planning: Multi-Jurisdictional Capitol Area Commutes O O O O Capitol Connections O O O Planning: State Campus G-1 Zone: Future Growth State Campus and Buildings (inc. Ford) O O O O O

G-2 Zone: The Mall, John Ireland, On-Campus Parks & Open Spaces O O O

Studies Visitor Experience O O City + Off-Campus Parks & Open Spaces O Land Use Diversity O O O O O O District Frameworks Capitol Rice- COMPLETE O O O O Capitol Heights O O O O Fitzgerald Park O O O O O

planning work primarily contributes to this Principle O planning work also contributes to this Principle O planning work may occur after draft of chapter is written; revisions will be submitted as necessary


Capitol Area Commutes Planning: Multi-Jurisdictional

Description

Long-range planning focused on the reducing the parking demand and improving mobility options in the Capitol Area.

Planning Track Results

COMPLETED 1. Study of parking supply and utilization (including State facilities in Capitol Rice district and Capitol Area) 2. Interagency collaboration & stakeholder engagement 3. Development of district wide mobility and parking standards for new development* 4. Stakeholder values and commuter patterns surveyed and documented 5. State sustainability coordinators surveyed and findings summarized 6. Development of Capitol Rice mobility hub vision and standards * Potential for partner assistance is also now in place for review of a Mobility and Parking Plan (MPP) submitted by applicant of potential MX Master Plan ONGOING/ DESIRED 7. Measure current mode split on State Campus and in Capitol Area 8. Assess building-by-building bike and pedestrian amenities, condition, safety concerns etc (gap analysis) 9. Research bike and ped street count technology and methodology 10. Best practices and precedent documentation 11. Educate new workers and commuters as to available choices 12. Spurring innovative practices among seven partners 13. Support partners in pursuing funding and support for Capitol Area innovations 14. Guidance and learning useful for development OES’ statewide enterprise mobility policy 15. Capitol Area’s Comprehensive plan policies confirmed 16. Capitol Area’s Comprehensive plan policies developed 17. Development of implementation strategy for mobility hub vision 18. Begin Phase III and IV: Develop strategy to benefit Capitol Area commuters and implements any new policies and

support its implementation 19. Educate area stakeholders about best practices and support implementation efforts 20. Where possible, conduct or support small pilot projects to test application of best practices Key Tasks and Estimated Duration

Phase I ....................................................................................................................................................... 2016-2017 – Complete Conducted parking utilization study along Rice Street.

Phase II .................................................................................................................................................................................. 2018 Assess commuting patterns of workers throughout the entire Capitol Area.

Phases III and IV (if funded) ..................................................................................................................................... 2019 onward Action planning and strategic implementation.


Capitol Connections (Re-thinking I-94) Planning: Multi-Jurisdictional

Description

Planning to evaluate and recommend improvements to the connection between the Capitol Area and downtown.


COMPLETED 1. Document issues and conditions in the field 2. Identify focus areas to be studied 3. Developed Sears Site ‘public realm framework’ 4. Communicate land use issues and focus areas to MNDOT Rethinking I-94 office 5. Establish working relationship with City of St Paul on capital investment priorities 6. Establish working relationship with MNDOT Rethinking I-94 office (CAAPB has seat on Planning and Policy Committee for

their Phase II work) DESIRED 7. Outline goals for MNDOT’s next ‘mainline’ investment (due in April 2019) 8. Comprehensive plan policy development; resume work with MNDOT and City on remaining focus areas to develop basic

policy/strategies for: a. land bridge feasibility study (focus east Wabasha or Cedar to Jackson) b. study two key intersections c. opportunity site studies (10th & Cedar) (moved to Fitzgerald Park planning) d. bridge maintenance & public realm enhancements memo (CAAPB goals outlined for MNDOT)

9. Outline goals for MNDOT’s long range upgrades or changes in and near Capitol Area Key Tasks and Estimated Duration

Outline goals for City’s long range upgrades or changes in and near Capitol Area .................................................... (in process) Issue Identification ............................................................................................................................. June-Sept 2018 – Complete Focus Areas ............................................................................................................................................................................. TBD • Connectivity Improvement Concepts – Before/After Street Sections • Land Bridge Feasibility Study – East Of Wabasha to Jackson • Sears Site Public Realm Framework – Draft Site Planning Guidelines & Standards Chapter 7a – Complete • Intersection Studies – Before/After Plan Diagrams • Multi-Agency Bridge Maintenance Models

To guide content for Principle 7D and in fulfillment of this Capitol Area objective, called for in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan, pg 20: “Connect the Capitol to and from downtown Saint Paul and the Mississippi River. • Seek inspiration from Cass Gilbert’s vision. • Develop view corridors oriented in two directions. • Preserve and design major approach routes to provide and protect visual orientation and attractive views of the Capitol and

downtown landmarks. • Reinforce Cedar Street as a major visual and pedestrian connection between the Capitol Area and the downtown area. • Reinforce Wabasha Street as a connection to a river crossing, the Wabasha Street Bridge. • Reinforce Robert Street as a major organizational spine within the Capitol Campus, the visual terminus of Cass Gilbert Park and a

primary connector with downtown Saint Paul. • Improve John Ireland Boulevard between the Capitol and the Saint Paul Cathedral. • Employ setbacks and height restrictions to reinforce the role of the original site of Seven Corners as an important approach and view

corridor. • Consistent with the 1931 Cass Gilbert Plan for the City, enhance the axial relationship to the river and related vistas such as those

from the High Bridge and Smith Avenue south of the river, and the western gateway to downtown Saint Paul at West 7th Street and Kellogg Boulevard.”


G-1 Zone: Future Growth State Campus and Buildings (inc. Ford) Planning: State Campus

Subpart 1. District intent The intent of the G-1 Governmental District is to provide for the orderly growth of state government and the preservation and enhancement of existing structures within the Capitol area. Description

The overall goal for this planning track is to review, affirm (and update as necessary) comprehensive plan policy impacting the zoning and design regulatory guidance determining the long range land use and built form of parcels in the G-1 district of the Capitol Area.


DESIRED 1. Collaboratively update and confirm block development parameters and design guidelines for State Lot C/Ford Building

Block and Lot AA block.

“How does the Department of Administration envision the future disposition of Lot C/Ford Building* block? Also, please submit any pre-development or pre-design studies executed for State property on this block since 2010.” Note: 2010 is the last date of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan for the Minnesota State Capitol Area.

“How does the Department of Administration envision the future disposition of Lot AA block? Also, please submit any pre-development or pre-design studies executed for State property on this block since 2010.” Note: Also see Ford Building Re-use study addressed separately

2. Estimate the current or projected need to lease additional office space in the Capitol Area. Note: In the recently adopted Capitol Rice Development Framework adopted by CAAPB, strong encouragement is included to explore possibility of a shared parking facility to replace the loss of surface parking and serve multiple users.

“Are there any existing plans or anticipated (or potential) future need for leased office space in the Capitol Area? Such as within;

i. new private office building in Sears redevelopment; ii. private office building (Capitol Office Building on Park Street);

iii. private office building (@ 555 Park) iv. private office building (Capitol Ridge) v. other

3. Gauge the State of Minnesota’s interest in participation in redevelopment of the City/County public health building site on southwest corner of 11th and Cedar.

“Would the State of Minnesota consider purchase and redevelopment of the existing City/County public health building site at the southwest corner of 11th and Cedar?”

4. The State of Minnesota has long range objectives that should be affirmed, updated, strengthened or otherwise accounted for in 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the Capitol Area.

“In the absence of a new or updated Strategic Plan for Locating State Agencies, please identify the key elements of the previous strategic plan that are still active policy.”

“Are there existing elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the Minnesota State Capitol Area that you would like to request to be modified, updated, protected, strengthened or otherwise modified? Are there new directions that you envision that should be included?


G-1 Zone: Future Growth State Campus and Buildings continued Planning: State Campus

Key Tasks and Estimated Duration

Initial Request for Information from Department of Administration ..................................................... est work effort: 20 hours Prepare and send a detailed Comprehensive Plan update, along with information on future planning to Department of Administration. The communication will also explain the request for collaboration with Admin on G-1 zoning district.

Request for Information: State Growth ....................................................................................................... est duration: 1 month

Request for Admin to provide information enabling the development of a prioritized framework for growth (in lieu of updated Strategic Plan for Locating State Agencies) including provision of information regarding new buildings, renovation and preservation.

Request for Information: Building Sustainability Initiatives ........................................................................ est duration: 1 month Discuss sustainability initiatives for future State buildings to be expressed in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan

FORD BUILDING ....................................................................................................................................................................... TBD Ford Building

Review of Existing Ford Building Studies ................................................................................................ est work effort: xx hours Team: Architectural Advisor Michael Bjornberg leading, with support/input from Amy Spong, Department of Administration and CAAPB staff.

Ford Building Re-use Study ...................................................................................................................................................... TBD

Revisit and update the 1990’s re-use study to assess suitable scenarios of redevelopment, including site redevelopment guidelines that supply design parameters for future steps. The re-use study should verify the structural stability of the building and explore a full range of alternatives for building disposition, accompanied by cost estimates, from full building to partial or complete demolition.

If funded in the future, based on possibility re-use: Site Pre-Design Study .............................................................................................................................................................. TBD

Informed by the Ford Building Re-Use Study, conduct a site pre-design study (required by law) to determine need and program for the particular use.

Design Competition ................................................................................................................................................................. TBD

CAAPB-led design competition.


G-2 Zone: The Mall, John Ireland, On-Campus Parks & Open Spaces Planning: State Campus

Subpart 1. District intent The intent of the G-2 Government District is to provide for the preservation and enhancement of the State Capitol, and the creation and preservation of open space within the Capitol area. Subp. 2. Parking placement Surface parking within the G-2 District is considered an interim use, with the intent that it will ultimately be replaced with underground parking or structured parking in another zoning district. Surface parking must be screened from streets and adjacent uses as specified in part 2400.2630. Description

The overall goal for this planning track is to review, affirm (and update as necessary) comprehensive plan policy impacting the zoning and design regulatory guidance for areas in the G-2 Zoning District, Capitol Mall and Open Space.


DESIRED 1. Identify important institutional knowledge of long-term employees to be captured. 2. Examine need for an updated Mall Framework plan in order to:

o prepare for changes in campus landscape planning given known disease issues and climate change o document accessibility issues for future design consideration o identify and prioritize necessary new investments on the Mall. o update the overall framework vision for the best uses, programming and management of:

a) Leif Erickson Park b) John Ireland c) Cass Gilbert Park d) Upper Mall e) Lower Mall

3. Examine need for updated vision and policy for Memorials in order to: o prepare for new memorials and commemorative (or other) public art on the Mall o create a more cohesive mall experience o proactively plan for how new mall memorial requests will be handled, with the bigger goals of the mall

experience in mind 4. Proactively address any other issues in need of resolution such as aging population, ongoing safety and impacts of new

adjacent mixed use development. 5. Modify CAAPB’s Zoning and Design Rules (if necessary) to accommodate the updated vision. Key Tasks and Estimated Duration

Request for Information from Department of Administration ............................................................... est work effort: 20 hours Prepare and send a detailed Comprehensive Plan update, along with information on future planning to Department of Administration. The communication will also explain the request for collaboration with Admin on G-2 zoning district.

Issue Identification; Scoping Future Studies/Planning ............................................................................ est work effort 40 hours • Document existing, emerging and long range issues/challenges in the G-2 zoning district (for example: climate change,

Accessibility) • Identify Key Stakeholders for each issue for follow-up, as needed • Scope other studies/plans to be developed in the future

Additional Meetings with key stakeholders as needed .......................................................................................................... TBD • Additional meetings with specific subject matter experts for each issue may be required.


Visitor Experience Studies

Description

The first Principle for the Capitol Area states:

As Minnesota’s seat of government and destination for thousands each year, the Capitol Area offers the highest quality experience to visitors.

By surveying the visitors (and people who interact with visitors) we will better understand what the visitor experience is today and where there are gaps in providing the highest quality visitor experience. Planning Track Desired Results

1. To document issues surrounding the experience of visitors to the Capitol Area, specifically those visiting the Capitol and key campus buildings

2. To affirm or revise existing Comprehensive plan policies and strategies already in place and assess obstacles to implementation

3. To identify need for new policy or strategies addressing (but not limited to): a. a visitor center or amenities (non-staffed) b. strategies to improve visitor experience c. To encourage mode shift to reduce parking demand and increase sustainability d. To broadly improve visitor convenience, safety and experiences


Define Visitors and Known Issues ........................................................................................................... est work effort: 10 hours • Identify typical visitors. • Identify key contacts for each visitor type for visitor/issue input (e.g. Brian Pease to reach out to school group

contacts) • What is the visitor experience today? Document known issues (parking, signage, amenities, etc.)

Define and Draft Surveys ........................................................................................................................ est work effort: 30 hours • Define number of surveys needed • Write survey questions for each visitor type

Administer Surveys .................................................................................................................................... est duration: 5 months • Administer surveys for each group

Analyze Data .......................................................................................................................................... est duration: 1-2 months • Consolidate and analyze results; report to Board; • Contribute content to Comprehensive Plan Principle 1 chapter development (primarily)


City + Off-Campus Parks & Open Spaces Studies

Description

Study of non-mall parks and open spaces in the Capitol Area and nearby context. There is a need to better understand the parks and open spaces in the Capitol Area and how they contribute to a quality public realm. Additionally, how is the Capitol Area connected to adjacent public spaces, such as Western Park and Scheffer Park.

Planning Track Results (DESIRED)

1. Understand the existing open spaces and parks in the Capitol Area, how they complement each other and the Capitol Campus, and how effectively they serve residents and workers. o Identify gaps in open/park space amenities (for example: Is there a tot lot within 6 blocks of all housing? What is the

balance between active vs. passive space?) o Identify programming opportunities for the City or park/open space owner to enhance community cohesion and

serve residents and workers. o Identify opportunities for the City to enhance streets or walkways to create green linkages between open spaces,

enhancing walkability in the area. o Document areas where accessibility should be improved. o Identify opportunities for private landowners to participate in developing new municipal park spaces, shared

(community) gardens or privately-owned-public-spaces (POPS) (For example: Seritage, Como Place, Clear Channel’s corner greens), and develop basic guidelines as necessary.

o Identify optimal locations for public art in Capitol Area (outside the G-1 and G-2 Districts), possibly working with Public Art Saint Paul or other community-based arts organizations.


Existing Park and Open Space Mapping/Documentation ..................................................................... est work effort: 40-80 hrs • Mapping: Park and open space physical mapping, including connectivity • Documentation: Park and open space primary users, typology, role, assets, etc. documentation • Documentation: Accessibility and sustainability • TBD: User counts and surveys in area parks • TBD: Meetings with Saint Paul Parks and Recreation

Gap Analysis and Recommendations ......................................................................................................... est work effort: 40 hrs • Reviewing mapping and documentation of existing parks and open space, identify gaps • Determine Sustainability goals/gaps (if any) • Determine Accessibility goals/gaps • Examine existing policy and draft recommended additions/changes

Mapping/Graphic Development of Data ................................................................................................................................. TBD

In fulfillment of this Capitol Area objective, called for in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan, pg 60: “Establish a system of linkages to and between parks in the Capitol Area • Make connections between open spaces to create a city-wide system of parks. • Maintain the dignity of open spaces in the landscape framework. • Secure endowments for the maintenance of open spaces and landscaping. • Assess existing parks, trails and open spaces and determine what else is needed. • Designate sites for additional green space with consideration for access, population density in surrounding blocks, and

relationship to redevelopment activities. • Provide supportive open spaces such as parks or plazas as focal points and gathering places within each distinct neighborhood. • Accommodate a variety of community and recreational needs. • Provide for both active and passive open space uses. • Satisfy open space needs in new developments and deficient existing areas. • Encourage private developers to create open space within their projects at street level. • Establish neighborhood play areas and gardens on lots where new construction is not immediately foreseen. • Identify public and private funding sources for acquisition and maintenance of open spaces. • Create pedestrian corridors and greenways through the Sears Block to improve linkage of parks to the Capitol Campus.”


Land Use Diversity Studies

Description

There is a need to better understand the existing land use mix within the Capitol Area. This base knowledge will help inform future decisions regarding commercial and housing development. As projects come before the Board in the future, this study will provide the basis to answer the question: Do the proposed new developments contribute to more diversity in the Capitol Area? The study will focus on housing diversity and commercial/retail diversity. Planning Track Results

DESIRED 1. Profile (baseline) current ‘Urban Village Mix’ of commercial services in Capitol Rice District.) 2. Profile (baseline) current housing choices;

a. within Capitol Rice District and immediate context. b. for entire Capitol Area.


Housing: Existing Data Gathering .......................................................................................................................................... TBD Gather data on existing housing stock in Capitol Area, including type, age, and rent vs. own. Primary data source: Ramsey County GIS parcel data. Additional meetings to supplement, confirm and interpret data may be required.

Commercial/Institutional: Existing Data Gathering ............................................................................................................... TBD

Gather data on existing commercial and industrial uses in Capitol Area. Urban Village Mix Analysis and Recommendations ............................................................................................................... TBD • Analyze housing and commercial/industrial data against set standards. (LEED-ND? Farr complete neighborhoods

analysis?) • Refer to county and city housing diversity goals to compare Capitol Area contribution and alignment with larger goals. • Examine existing policy and draft recommended additions/changes, setting baseline to inform future development

decisions. Mapping/Graphic Development of Data ................................................................................................................................. TBD


Capitol Rice District Frameworks

Description

This planning track includes two successive community and stakeholder involved planning initiatives led by CAAPB staff, resulting in two plan documents:

The Capitol Rice Commercial Vitality Zone Strategy, was an initiative funded by the City of Saint Paul’s CVZ program. The goal of this initiative led to a clear set of implementable actions that would help foster increased commercial vitality on Rice Street north of University in the Capitol Area while building community and increasing awareness of issues among community members. Five major strategies emerged from that planning, which began in 2016 and culminated in an event in January 2018. The outreach efforts included multiple survey stations that generated 500+ ideas, a survey, creative placemaking projects capturing community values, and four open studio design sessions where community members were invited to review and impact the emerging community planning in more depth. The City began implementation with the Building Upgrade Fund in early 2019, with CAAPB staff participating in a guiding role in approval of 12-14 small business projects in the corridor granted $20,000 each. CAAPB staff has also continued involvement in regional multi-jurisdiction planning for ‘mobility hubs’.

The second document, The Capitol Rice Development Framework, was adopted in January 2019 as a component of Chapter 7 of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Nearly twenty stakeholder and community groups and public agencies reviewed and provide comment on the plan ahead of unanimous Board approvals in late 2018 and early 2019. Developed by CAAPB staff, The Framework largely affirmed the key urban village visions and strategies from the previous Comprehensive Plan, the Rice Station Area Plan, and the Capitol Rice CVZ Strategy. The document also established clarity around built form, land use, mobility, environmental standards and clarified the dual CAAPB/City development review and approval process for large new development(s) in the Capitol Rice District.

Results of Planning Track

COMPLETED 1. District stakeholder participation in planning 2. District stakeholder awareness of current community issues 3. Development of CAAPB Stakeholder network 4. Community building 5. Business corridor public investment strategy (determined best use of CVZ funds) 6. Stakeholder values documented 7. Stakeholder ideas documented 8. Establish working relationship with PED on community development 9. Establish working relationship with Ramsey County engineers on community process and long range Rice Street redesign

issues 10. Comprehensive plan (existing) policies confirmed 11. Comprehensive plan (new) policies developed ONGOING/ DESIRED 12. Business Corridor Revitalization 13. Mobility Hub Implementation 14. Process for redevelopment 15. Implementation of Capitol Rice Strategy Key Tasks and Duration

Community Engagement ............................................................................................................. June 2017-Jan 2018 – Complete Capitol Rice CVZ Strategy Report ............................................................................... March 2018 Submitted to City – Complete CVZ Applications and Awards ................................................................................................................ Dec-Jan 2018 – Complete Implementation ............................................................................................................................................ Begin February 2019


Capitol Heights District Frameworks

Description

The entirety of the Capitol Heights neighborhood falls within the Capitol Area. A thorough small area planning process is required to update the Area Plan for Capitol Heights. Planning Track Results

DESIRED 1. Positive relationship with Capitol Heights neighborhood residents and employers 2. Thorough understanding of existing issues how the context of the greater Capitol Area affects Capitol Heights

(particularly upcoming changes in Capitol Rice.) 3. Creation of a Small Area Plan for the neighborhood, following a thorough community engagement process. Key Tasks and Estimated Duration

Attend Block Club Meeting ....................................................................................................................... est work effort: 8 hours Prepare for and attend block club meeting in order to: • Introduce planning process and v1 of plan: relevant existing content. Discuss neighborhood profile, as documented in

existing Area Plan and Comp Plan for Capitol Area. • Request 3-5 people to serve as Capitol Heights stakeholder representatives on Comprehensive Plan development and

review. • Introduce and discuss future community engagement process.

Establish Capitol Heights Block Clubs’ Comp Plan Review Team ........................................................... est duration: 5-7 months

Establish a small group representing Capitol Heights (three to five members appointed by Capitol Heights Block Club to represent the Capitol Heights Block Club) to be active in reviews of the full Comprehensive Plan for the Capitol Area. Expected service through June 2020. Most relevant chapters to Capitol Heights neighborhood are: • Review of Principle 3 policy • Review of Principle 4 policy • Review of Principle 6 policy • Review of Principle 7 policy

Perform subsequent (formal) Capitol Heights Neighborhood Plan Update .............................................. est duration: 6 months

Set expectations with the Capitol Heights Block Club that a formal (small area?) neighborhood planning process should be completed that would be led, developed and accepted by CAAPB office, that builds on: • Frogtown small area plan (SMAPL); • St Paul Comprehensive Plan; • The 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the Minnesota State Capitol Area. • The Capitol Heights updated plan (2014)

The date to begin an adequate plan process addressing the neighborhood systems is to be determined. It may not feasible within the next year, due to staffing and funding. Should the planning process complete after release of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Capitol Heights Neighborhood Plan will be submitted to the Board as an amendment* to the Comprehensive Plan.

*This is consistent with how many city comprehensive plans are developed and amended in large cities – the larger area plan covers setting in general principles, policies and standards, and documents community-wide values, with independent small area plans, informing and building off of the comprehensive plan, often adopted as amendments to the city comprehensive plan. Small Area Plans operate at different schedule than comprehensive plans.


Fitzgerald Park District Frameworks

Description

Five blocks of the Fitzgerald Park neighborhood falls within the Capitol Area. As such, the CAAPB is a major stakeholder in the city’s planning efforts. Additionally, the five blocks are important in how the Capitol Area connects the downtown Saint Paul. This planning track outlines our efforts to work with the City of Saint Paul PED in its planning efforts, as well as CAAPB responsibility to reach out to building owner/managers regarding our Comprehensive Plan and upcoming zoning update.


DESIRED 1. Revisit 2006 Fitzgerald Park Plan and 2010 Addendum– (bring forward elements relevant to Capitol Area, affirm with

stakeholders.) 2. Update planning to reflect issues concerning:

a. 10th Street Station b. Pedro Park (status and/or changes) c. Lunds & Penfield block (new impacts from redevelopment) d. Check on Building Reuse: Church of Scientology (formerly Science Museum) w/internal park e. Check on Building Reuse: Arts & Science Building/Upper Mississippi Academy (formerly McNally) f. Redevelopment Plans/Opportunity Site: City /County Public Health Building Site


Contact City of Saint Paul PED ....................................................................................................................est work effort: 1 hour Contact City of Saint Paul PED (Lucy Thompson and Katy Dadlez) regarding upcoming Capitol River Council planning. Propose to participate as one of the Stakeholders in their planning process.

Participate in planning with Capitol River Council, as appropriate .......................................................................... duration TBD

Planning process to be determined based on feedback from Saint Paul PED in Spring/Summer 2019 Proceed with meetings with major landowners/managers of the 5 blocks of the Capitol Area ............ est work effort: 15 hours

As part of an outreach plan, meet with landowners/managers of the five blocks of Fitzgerald Park that fall within the Capitol Area to: • inform them of our Comprehensive Plan process and upcoming Zoning updates; • inform them of how we interface with the Capitol River Council, City of Saint Paul or other stakeholder groups; and • hear any issues or concerns they have moving forward.

Comprehensive Plan Committee Update pg 1 of 2 Attachment D

Attachment D: Public Agency Technical Resources (List of staff receiving inter-agency requests for collaboration and information from CAAPB)

Planning Tracks and Studies

City of Saint Paul (pending review and confirmation by PED, via

Luis Pereira, PED Planning Director)

State of Minnesota Department of Administration

(pending review and confirmation by Commissioner’s Office, via Erin

Campbell?)

Other Public Agencies, Offices and Departments

Office/Dept Contact Office/Dept Contact

Planning: Multi-Jurisdictional

Capitol Area Commutes PED Public Works

Tony Johnson (several staff contribute)

FMD FMD OES

Chris Guevin Kari Suchy Marcus Grubbs

Metro Transit MNDOT

Dept of Health

Saint Paul’s TMO

Kelly Morrell Lisa Austin, Amber Dallman and others Emily Smoak TBD, Move Minnesota

Capitol Connections PED PED

Public Works

Kady Dadlez Anton Jerve David Kuebler, Reuben Collins

FMD RECS

Chris Guevin Wayne Waslaski, Gordon Christofferson

MNDOT MNDOT

Ramsey County Metro Transit

Bill Goff Cyrus Knutson TBD Lucy Galbraith, others

Planning: State Campus

G-1 Zone: Future Growth State Campus and Buildings (includes Ford Building Study)

RECS FMD FMD

SHPO

Wayne Wasklaski Chris Guevin Joe Dinnebier Amy Spong

G-2 Zone: The Mall, John Ireland and On-Campus Parks & Open Spaces

FMD FMD

SHPO

Chris Guevin Joe Dinnebier Amy Spong

Studies

Visitor Experience FMD FMD

MNHS MNHS

Anne Johnson Chris Guevin Brian Pease Sheila Brower

City + Off-Campus Parks & Open Spaces

PED PED

Parks & Recreation

Tony Johnson Lucy Thompson / Kady Dadlez Ellen Stewart

Land Use Diversity PED & Housing TBD

Comprehensive Plan Committee Update pg 2 of 2 Attachment D

District Frameworks

Capitol Rice - COMPLETE PED PED PED PED

Public Works Parks & Rec

Luis Pereira Lucy Thompson Tony Johnson Nora Reimenschneider David Kuebler Ellen Stewart

EQB Metro Transit

Ramsey County Engineering

Denise Wilson Kelly Morrell Nick Fischer

Capitol Heights PED Tony Johnson RECS Wayne Waslaski FNA Capitol Heights

Block Club

Caty Royce, Tia (?) Don Grundhauser (Chair)

Fitzgerald Park PED

Public Works

Lucy Thompson Kady Dadlez TBD

RECS Wayne Waslaski Metro Transit MNDOT

Ramsey County

TBD TBD TBD

City of Saint Paul PED Planning and Economic Development Department of Administration FMD Facilities Management Department OES Office of Enterprise Sustainability RECS Real Estate and Construction Services SHPO State Historic Preservation Office Other Agencies and Departments MNDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation MNHS Minnesota Historical Society EQB Minnesota Environmental Quality Board TMO Travel Management Organization FNA Frogtown Neighborhood Association

Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Document Development:

Unified Texts

Map of Public Realm Policy 2017 Draft

Map of Built Form and Land Use Policy 2017 Draft

Ch 7A and Capitol Rice Dev Framework

2040 CompPlan Chapter Development Phase

2040 CompPlan Graphic Design Phase

2040 CompPlan Approvals Phase

Communication/Outreach:

Board Meetings 6/15 11/15 3/23 6/18 10/4 12/11 1/23

Committee Meetings 6/15 9/12, 10/9 2/26 6/25 9/12 11/7,11/27

Public Agency Resource Meetings as needed throughout development process

Govdelivery email

Updated: 4/15/2019Development CAAPB Board Meeting Status:

Publish to Website Committee Meeting Planned in blue

Board Adoption eNewsletter Updates Complete in green

20202040 2017 2018 2019

Update Zoning

Comprehensive Plan

90 Days Min

Estimate

Estimate

Development Process

Attachment E: Comprehensive Plan Timeline

Documents

Capitol Area Architectural and Planning Board and Attachments with...Graphic Development Phase: creating a final document, in the 11x11 format with supporting graphics 3. Review and