KFNA Redevelopment Committee
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
7 – 9 P.M. Martin Luther King Park
Attendance: 20-30 people total
Redevelopment Committee Member
Peter Hallstrom, Mark Hinds, Arthur Knowles, Tom Parent, Dave Saddoris

KFNA Staff: Sarah Linnes-Robinson and Joanna S. Hallstrom

Guests:
Kingfield Residents
CM Elizabeth Glidden
Harold Troup, Hennepin County, Taxpayer Services Department (4307 Wentworth)

Call to order / Introduction Tom Parent, chair of the KFNA redevelopment committee called the meeting to order. Parent explained that Plymouth Church Foundation (PCNF) was asked not to send representatives to this meeting, so that Kingfield residents could efficiently organize their concerns and process.  Parent presented a tentative schedule for a 3-month process from January to March that included the formation of planning groups to work on research of identified concerns. After group discussion it was requested by residents that PCNF and YouthLink respond first and directly to the questions and concerns identified in November. Then the group/committee would like to decide what other sources of information/research need to be solicited before March.

The group also decided not to break out into small groups as was planned but reviewed the list of identified questions and concerns together. Questions and concerns were listed under the following categories: Building Mass / Architecture, Social Service Model, Property Value Impact, Community Outreach and crime Prevention and Safety.
Please review the November 07 redevelopment minutes for a complete list of questions and concerns.  Parent walked the group through each topic and list of questions. The following is a summary of in-depth/new questions that need to be addressed:
-Demonstrate the research as to why retail on at 37th and Nicollet is viable and beneficial the project and greater community? What are alternative retail ideas (besides a coffee shop)?
-How is Metro Transit going to be engaged in determining the location and changes of the bus stops at this site?
-Give more explanation about the building mass and orientation and demonstrate how CPTED principals will be applied. Address internal and external security concerns.
-Provide a more detailed description of the service model and what type of participation will be required of each resident.
-Clarify the difference between transitional and supportive housing programs.
-Detail who will be responsible for the building maintenance, management etc.
-Why is there no front yard space? Explain where the green space will be and how it will be used.
-What is the time line for the Phase II family housing? Will it be completed at the same time as the youth housing?

Next Steps:
Request written responses to questions designated for PCNF and other parties.

Schedule presentation from PCNF/YouthLink to address questions and talk more about the service model that will be applied to this site. The group would like the written responses to questions prior to the meeting.

Schedule a presentation for PCNF architect to talk more in-depth about the building mass and orientation.

After PCNF/YouthLink presentation identify which issues need more follow-up.

Develop the time line to complete community feedback process by March 2008.

One resident volunteered to assist in gathering crime and safety information – Hallstrom took his contact information.

New Redevelopment Committee Items: Redevelopment committee members met after the large group meeting to address the following.

Minneapolis Comprehensive Plan – Open Houses: Hinds reported that KFNA needs to review the Minneapolis Comprehensive Plan to understand and challenge if necessary, the land use and corridor designations.  KFNA should also help promote the informational open houses to residents hosted by the City.

Hennepin County’s “Building Better Neighborhoods” program: Harold Troup of Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department presented the County’s plans for the rehabilitation of 4307 Wentworth, a recently tax-forfeited boarded up property.  This is effort is part of Hennepin County’s “Building Better Neighborhoods” program.  The property is currently a small non conforming one bedroom structure on an average size lot (40’ x132’). The proposed rehabilitation features a wider footprint with a second story addition, complimenting the other homes on the block. The first floor layout includes a large living room / dining room, a bathroom and kitchen with eating area. The upper floor will include four bedrooms and two full bathrooms. A two car garage is also included in the project. The County would like to have the rehab of the property completed by April in time for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Home Tour.

This project is a collaboration between Hennepin County, Kingfield Neighborhood Association and city of Lake Community Land Trust to produce a home that fits the existing character of the neighborhood, is perpetually affordable and also energy efficient with green design features. Troup stated that they will apply LEAD guidelines to the rehab but will have budget limitations that will control some of the material selected and used in the project.

Troup would like feedback from KFNA as soon as possible. Since the County plans to finish the project by April they may have to start construction on the site before official feedback and support is received from the KFNA board. The committee does want to offer and push for alternatives to cheap materials often used in similar projects (i.e.vinyl siding).

Parent will draft a letter of support for the project for the redevelopment committee to review and discuss via email. A final draft will be submitted for approval at the January 9th KFNA board meeting.

Minutes completed by Joanna S. Hallstrom, NRP Project Organizer

Kingfield Crime and Safety Meeting
Tuesday, December 18
7-8:30pm
MLK Park

Attendance
Kingfield Residents- 14
MLK Park Staff: Brian Cornell, MLK Park Director
MPD- CPS Tom Thompson; Lt Marie Przynski
Fifth Precinct Community Attorney- Lisa Goden
Crime and Safety Task Force Board Representative- Amy Gracyalny
KFNA Staff- Joanna S. Hallstrom, Project Organizer
Guest: Matt Perry, EHNA

Announcements:
1) The Minneapolis Police Department is seeking nominations for its annual Building Blocks and 2007 Teresa S. Ruhland Youth awards. The Building Blocks awards recognize successful block clubs in the city, and the Teresa S. Ruhland Youth Award recognizes the efforts of a volunteer who works with young people.
Minneapolis has a long tradition of strong block clubs that work with the police to prevent crime, connect neighbors, and take on issues in the neighborhood. The Minneapolis Police Department recognizes this partnership by giving its annual Building Blocks awards to the most active and effective block clubs in the city. The deadline for the receipt of nominations for the annual Building Blocks awards is Tuesday, Jan. 15, 2008. HYPERLINK “http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/news/docs/07BuildingBlocks.pdf” \o “blocked::http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/news/docs/07BuildingBlocks.pdf
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/news/docs/07BuildingBlocks.pdf” Annual Building Blocks Awards nomination information (pdf)
Read more

Kingfield Neighborhood Association
Board Meeting
Dec. 12, 2007
MLK Park

Board Members Present: David Brauer, Ben Kristensen, Chris Sur, Amy Joe Gracyalny, Darrell Gerber, Dave Saddoris, Tom Parent, and Arthur Knowles.
Absent: David Potosky, Mary Hunter, Niki Stavrou, JobyLynn Sassily, and Karen Pieper.
KFNA Staff present: Sarah Linnes-Robinson
Also present: Approximately 10 persons, in various capacities.

Meeting called to order at 7:08 P.M.

I. Community Forum – No issues were brought up at this time. Anything to be commented on was already listed on the agenda.

II. Park Report – Brian, from the park staff, reported that the month had been quiet. Also that the Park athletic programs were going well, and that there would be a MLK Day Celebration at the park in January.

III. Reports –
Secretary: Minutes approved with the two changes. First, that “was not what was needed.” Be inserted to finish the unfinished sentence. Second, that “Second ?” be replaced by “Second – Arthur”.

Treasurer: Sarah reported that there are still problems with the last three reports due to a problem with carrying funds forward between months. It was agreed that as soon as the problem could be fixed, reports would be forwarded via e-mail to the Board for an e-mail vote of approval.

IV. Committees and Task Forces
Redevelopment and Zoning – Harold Troup, a property manger for Henn. Cty. Tax Forfeit & Property Section, came to discuss the property at 4307 Wentworth, which has been forfeited to the County. He presented the three options open to the county, and asked the Board for a letter of support for the proposed plan: Replace the present unallowably small house with a four-bedroom home to be sold in partnership with the Lakes Country Land Trust. The county hopes to build the new structure up to LEED standards, as a pilot project of the County.   David Brauer asked about the support (or lack thereof) of the neighbors. Tom Parent suggested flyering the neighbors within 300 feet of the property to solicit input. Dave Saddoris moved (and Arthur seconded) “That a letter approving the County’s concept for the property, contingent on the support of the neighbors.” The motion passed without objection. Tom Parent volunteered to write the letter, the final form of which would be approved by an e-mail vote of the Board as soon as possible.

There were more questions from neighbors about the Board’s letter of support for Plymouth’s 3700 Nicollet Project. David Brauer explained that the letter was only a “support in concept”, and apologized (again) for any misunderstanding. The letter was not in anyway meant as neighborhood support for the particulars of the project as it has so far developed. The letter was sought to help the Foundation seek funding to explore the possibilities of developing a project. When neighbors’ misunderstanding became apparent, David Brauer called Council Woman Glidden and asked her to discount Kingfield’s letter of support of concept. She immediately agreed, but noted that it would not have affected the end result. Such applications are scored on a point basis, requiring 80 points to pass. The Plymouth Foundation scored 122 points, while Kingfield’s letter was only worth 5 points.

NRP – Duane Townsend, of Neighbors4NRP, requested a letter of support from the Board, to the City Council representative, supporting Neighbors4NRP three demands: Full Funding of NRP Phase 2 through 2009; the continuing funding of NRP beyond 2009; and the creation of an independent board to oversee the continuing NRP.   After discussion Arthur moved that the Board authorize a letter in support of neighbors4NRP. There was no second so the motion was withdrawn. Further discussion ensued and no action was taken.

Farmer’s Market – David Nicholson was recognized as the new Chair of the Farmer’s Market Committee. It was noted that certain Committee volunteers, whose experience was important, were not members of KFNA. After discussion, Arthur moved, and Tom seconded, “That up to 40% of the Farmer’s Market Committee may be drawn from non-members of KFNA, at the discretion of the Chair of the Committee.” The motion passed without objection.  Sarah told the Board that the Farmer’s Market had a $1,500 shortfall for 2007 out of total expenditures of $14,500. She requested the Board to authorize drawing funds from the KFNA Business Sponsorship revenue (approx. $4000) to cover the shortfall.  Darrell so moved, and Chris seconded. It passed without objection. Sarah suggested that the allocation of a certain percentage of business sponsorship funds to the Market might be desirable, although this dedication of funds might require a change in KFNA’s solicitation letter. After discussion, the Board declined to act upon the suggestion.

Transportation – Darrell distributed copies of the BRT (Bus Rapid Transit Taskforce) recommendations. It was also announced that the 46th street freeway ramps will be closed this or next month.

Wall Dogs – The Deck the Walls event raised approximately $850.00.

Lakes District Park Council – Our representative, Diana, cannot attend the meeting on 1/24/08.  Dave Brauer volunteered to attend unless someone else was available.

Arthur moved to adjourn. Tom seconded.

Kingfield Farmers’ Market Committee
Tuesday, December 4th
11:30-1:00
Corner Table

Attendance: Melinda Ludwigzack, David Nicholson, Scott Pampouch, Mary Hunter, Jobylynn Sassily James, David Brauer, Debra Bourne
KFNA Staff: Sarah Linnes-Robinson, Joanna Hallstrom

KFNA Board Update:
Linnes-Robinson reported that the KFNA board voted to add the Kingfield Farmers’ Market Committee as an official committee of the KFNA board.  The KFNA board also approved the access of NRP funding designated for the farmers’ market in 08 and 09 for use in 08. The total amount is $11,000.  Linnes-Robinson stated that these funds should be seen as a last resource since there are always available for the market. She stated that the market committee should make it a priority to secure other funding first.
The NRP funds available do not include KFNA staff time that can be allocated to the market in 08.
Funding for the market coordinator position, however, needs to be either raised or paid for from the NRP funds.

Committee Details:
Hallstrom walked the new committee through the KFNA board description of a committee. A committee list will be submitted to the KFNA Board in December for approval. Each committee of the board needs to have a board member on it. The committee still needs to identify an official board rep. At this time board members, David Brauer, Mary Hunter and Jobylynn Sassily James are on this committee but no one can commit to being a long-term KFNA boar representative. The committee will try to recruit a board member to represent the market at the next KFNA annual meeting and board elections. Jobylynn volunteered to be the board liaison since she is at most board meetings but doesn’t know if she can be at all the market meetings. David Brauer, KFNA board president, has committed to being on the committee through the transitional period.
Read more

Kingfield Pledge to Unplug, Crime in Kingfield, Living Art Call for Artists,  KFNA and King Park Hold Communication Meeting, Stormwater Management Project, and more…

December Newsletter

December Newsletter Meeting Minutes

KFNA Redevelopment Committee
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
7 – 9 P.M. Martin Luther King Park
Attendance: 70-80 people total
Redevelopment Committee Member
Rosemary Dolata, Peter Hallstrom, Mark Hinds, Arthur Knowles, Doug Kress, Tom Parent, Dave Saddoris

KFNA Staff: Sarah Linnes-Robinson and Joanna S. Hallstrom

Guests:
Kingfield Residents
CM Elizabeth Glidden
CPS Tom Thompson
Lt. Marie Przynski
Plymouth Church Neighborhood Foundation staff
John Jorde, 3846 Grand Conditional Use Permit

Call to order / Introduction
Tom Parent, chair of the KFNA redevelopment committee called the meeting to order. Parent gave an overview of the agenda for the night and outlined the purpose of this meeting. Parent took time to explain the role that the Redevelopment Committee and KFNA play in neighborhood developments.

Confirmation/Modifications of 3700 Nicollet PCNF Project Issue Categories
Parent walked the group through the process, established by the redevelopment committee and KFNA for moving forward in gathering community in put on the PCNF 3700 Nicollet development. Parent gave on overview of “Proposed Issue Categories” arrived at from analysis of questions and concerns raised regarding project to date. The committee planed for each issue categories to be addressed in a small group setting with a facilitator so that the questions and concerns around each topic could be adequately explored and recorded for subsequent research. Parent asked the group if there were other critical issues not being addressed in the small groups? None were identified. Parent outlined categories for small group discussion. Some residents voiced opposition to this process and asked to meet as one large group. After discussion, Parent directed the group back to the pre-established process of facilitated small groups.

Small Group Work Sessions lead by facilitators. The facilitators leading the small groups were members of the KFNA redevelopment committee. Residents were given the opportunity to choose which small group they wanted to participate in.  The facilitators gathered key questions, from resident small group participants. The KFNA redevelopment committee will work on identifying resources to answer questions and people responsible for providing research. KFNA residents were invited to volunteer to help with the research. PCNF staff was available during the working sessions to serve as a resource of information. A compilation of questions for each category is listed below.

Building Mass / Architecture / Mixed Use Viability: Tom Parent
Why is the retail where it is?
Where is the bus stop?
Why not the Thiesen Building?
Why not set back from street like other “houses”?
How were residents considered during design phase?
How will building security be addressed: Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) by MPD.
Why should it be secure? How secure does it have to be?
Resident’s access from the back might be beneficial.
Visual surveillance of entrance very important.
42 studio units not market sustainable, in case of use change.
Institutional character?
Room Layout and Dimensions? Humanizing?
How does it address Nicollet Ave.?
Social space within: suite verses individual rooms.
Precedent? Successful?
Sustaining operations?
Positive manageability?
Supporting Residents?
Tenant Longevity?
Maintenance of the facility: interior and exterior?
42 units? Site and zoning? Founding? Economy of scale?
Phase II: When and Why?
Open to suggestion on market rate verses affordable?
Need eyes on the alley and the street.
How to participate and involve?

Social Service Model: Rosie Dolata
Where is the research to support the programming proposal that includes 42 residents and only optional participation?
What is the Philosophical groundwork for the programming choice?
Is the support staff 9-5?
Institutional housing with people grouped together vs. models of inclusive living of these people in the community—is this too many people to group together?
Other models/structure for programming?
Who else serves this population?
How can we help the issue of homelessness as a community?
Personal decision not a community decision to help homeless and youth—adoption and foster care are personal options—this should not be a public decision.
How much help do the kids in this facility need?
What is the selection process for the tenant?
Who refers the kids?
Is there a sign-up list? Is it first come/first served?  This is what the public is hearing.
What kind of crimes excludes some one from living at the building?  Are there other exclusions?
How can they enforce the age?  Especially with public dollars?
What is the split of population between homeless kids and those aging out of foster care.
Is PCNF open to changing the program?  Is PCNF open to not having the program?
Is it a private or public facility?  How does this change the laws for tenants and who can be there?
What is the definition of “impacted” and “non-impacted” regarding the site?
Where will residents come from geographically?
Where do they get $$ for rent—do they need proof of work?  What is to guard against someone obtaining funds illegally?
What is the short and long-term funding of the facility?  What are the sources for the building and also for long-term maintenance and staffing?
Assuming that PCNF still want s to develop site, can’t they integrate these youth more into “a real life setting?”—include a variety of incomes, ages, family sizes into the building
What is the responsibility and involvement of the churches?  Do they have legal obligations?  Do they hire out all their responsibility?  Who, ultimately, is responsible?
Is there a mentoring commitment or opportunities, from church members?
Is PCNF open to a smaller facility?
How much are economics driving the program and unit numbers?  What happens in 5 years when the $$ runs out?
What is the county’s involvement and support and commitment?  County commissioners and county administrators
What has been the involvement of youth in planning this project?
Tax implications—residential and retail.  (Again, public or private facility?  Will the property be on tax roles?)
Ownership?
Retail +for Kingfield and tenants= needs for all
How many homeless youth (foster kids) are currently in Kingfield?
Apartment rules—visitation? Guests? Registration?  What about guests from other apartments?
Concentration of homeless youth=problem
Would neighbors be more comfortable with 42 new young residents dispersed throughout the neighborhood—yes, answered this group
Cost implications–# help and length of stay
What is current number of youth ageing out of their current situations (county question?)

Questions asked in Service Model Group that fall in other categories:
Building related question—most of Kingfield is residential so how does this fit in? Physically: in scale and appearance
Crime related questions—concern was expressed over crime number presented representing crimes at similar facilities…questions raised as to what types of facilities were these and their populations and rules and what is the neighborhood atmosphere?  Also what was the person’s connection to the address of the facility if they didn’t live there—were they with someone who did? Had they lived there?
Crime Questions—is it dangerous for youth to be in a crime area?  Will the youth result in an increase of crime in the neighborhood?
Crime question—Are people in a high density/low income living situation more or less susceptible to crime?
Crime question—what is the current status of gang activity?  How do we have this facility not grow this element?

Property Value Impact: Mark Hinds
Public safety questions
Will crime go up?
Who is ultimately responsible?  What people are looking for is whom they can call if there is a problem with the building.
The main concern here was the people in the group were concerned that the group in the building has the potential to create issues in the neighborhood, both in the building and outside of it.
Building design
It is not an attractive building.  There were a lot of strong negative feelings towards the exterior design of the building.
Does the density / type of building make sense?
Will a public property affect an assessor’s opinion?  This project was seen as being a public property.
What is the tax status of the property?
Will this property generate taxable income?
How does the building appearance and scale affect property values?
Service Model
What is the program structure?
Is the program structure and the whole model appropriate?  This question wasn’t just about the program at the site, but about this type of program in general.
Is a concentration/mixed model better?  There were concerns about concentrating poverty at the site vs. using more of a mix-income model.
Housing targeted toward youth. What is the selection process for the people who are going to live in the building?  There were a lot of concerns about this process, with people feeling that it was confusing and unstructured from the information that had been presented.
What is the structure of the housing programs?
What is the screening process with similar properties?
Will there be a lease addendum?  People really wanted to know what was going to be in the leases and how those provisions would be enforced.
What is the resident drug and alcohol policy?
Impact of Retail – one of the questions for this committee was to develop some thinking around the proposed retail component of the building.
What is the impact of retail on the neighborhood and the project?
Would the retail be supported or would it be market rate?
How many people would be employed on site?
What is the size of space / flexibility?
Who is going to operate the retail?
What is the market for retail at this site and with programming like this?
How many shops?
If retail was to go in the project, here is some thinking from the group on it.
Retail Likes
Retail dislikes
coffee-shop
co-op
restaurant
bakery
No pawn shops.
No cell phone, t-shirt or gun shops.

Next Steps
Invite neighborhoods with similar programs – YouthLinke/PCNF to talk to KFNA about project management.
Ask assessor/realtors about similar projects.
What is the academic research about the impact and effectiveness of similar projects? (Dave Saddoris volunteers to do this research)

Community Outreach: Arthur Knowles
Recommendations from small group discussion:  The purpose of our outreach is to inform the neighborhood and the immediate neighbors particularly, of the progress of this proposal. It was noted that there seems to be a lot of partial, or incorrect, information floating around.
Some people believe that this proposal is a “done deal”, but we need to stress that this is not.
This is the start of what we hope will be a most transparent process of exchanging and verifying information, and reaching a decision as a neighborhood. This will require
(as we began at the Nov. 28 meeting) gathering the questions and concerns of the neighbors, finding answers to these items, and relaying the information back to the neighbors. This could require two or three repetitions.
This back and forth flow of information is most easily done via e-mail and the Neighborhood website. In addition we should use the Kingfield News as much as possible. This will not aid the flow of information to and from those not connected to the internet. If possible, we should try to set up “phone trees” and encourage folks to volunteer to pass on information to those who are not connected. A few such volunteers, each contacting only two or three others, could do much to help information flow. And I believe we should consider additional large meetings as the neighbors deem necessary. This will require scheduling and fliering the neighborhood or at least the immediate neighbors. The fact is that many folks simply will not stay involved unless we remind them with fliers.

Crime Prevention / Safety: Doug Kress
General questions:
PCNF will be applying for and Conditional Use Permit. For what are they asking for a CUP?   What condition can the neighborhood add?
How many residents will be allowed to live in the 42 units?
Is the land already purchased?
What rights does the community have to fight this project?
What is the process to stop this project?
KFNA can give a formal letter either for or against this project. How will City Council weight this letter in their decision?
Crime questions:
Will crime increase or decrease in KFNA because of this project?  What data is available to support this answer?
Is there a general increase of crime in Kingfield? How much crime is specifically at the 3700 block of Nicollet?  What types of crime are occurring within a 2 block area?
When do we call 911?
What can be done to deter crime between 38th and 37th Street along Nicollet?
What are the school zoning requirements (i.e. a sex offender cannot live within xxx number of blocks from a school)? Is this project allowed based on the proximity it will be from Lake Country School and San Miguel Middle School?
What is the sex offender notification?
How many staff will be on site and at what times?
What is the role of supportive services?
Will youth have jobs before moving in?
Is the owner paying property taxes?
Who owns the building?
Who will manage and care for the building?
What is a manageable number of youth to serve in one location?  Is this too many?  What data do you have to support 42 is the correct number of units to be served in one site using the supportive services model for the age group proposed?
Would a similar but smaller scale supportive housing project be more manageable and have less impact on the surrounding community?
How many of the tenants will be foster kids?
If tenants are picked up for truancy and curfew violations who is notified and who will be responsible for their release?
How can a 16 year old sign a lease?
How will the police department be involved in this project?
How will the no alcohol policy be enforced?  What is the consequence for breaking the alcohol policy?
How will under age alcohol use be reported to the police?
How will entrances be controlled/secure?
How will the entrances and exits work?
What is the visitor policy?
Why did PCNF choose this location?
How do we create a win win situation?
How can our feedback change or influence the outcome?
What are the eviction rates for this type of housing project? How many evictions per year are considered average, low and high for this type of residence?
Could/would PCNF pay for an extra patrol officer in this area?
What funding did the KFNA letter support?
Have we exceeded the density planned by the City for this area?
How is Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) being used?
How can we clean up crime along Nicollet?
Can KFNA have input in the selection process for tenants?
Is this project too big?

Next Steps: Establish process & timetable for research, reporting of research, committee decisions, & reporting to community. The next redevelopment meeting will be on Wednesday, December 19th. This will be the beginning of multiple months of presentations and small group sessions relating to each identified issue categories.

New Redevelopment Committee Items: Redevelopment committee members met after the large group meeting to address the following.
Hennepin County Foreclosed Properties Follow Up: Regarding the 4307 Wentworth property The committee decided to address this item through an email discussion. This committee is being asked to recommend whether this property should be rehabbed and sold on the open market to the highest bid, rehabbed and sold as part of the Land Trust, or rehabbed and lease to the county for a home site for supportive housing and services..

Conditional Use Permit 3846 Grand Avenue: John Jorde, owner of 3846 Grand presented plans to add a fifth unit in the basement of his owner-occupied four-plex.
He was able to demonstrate five off-street parking places which is a requirement of the City. His design showed one egress window in the bedroom and operable windows for the other rooms. Jorde was encouraged to do more landscaping on the exterior of his building.

Hinds made a motion to support the addition of a 5th unit if the zoning fits the context of the project. Motion passed unopposed. Jorde needs a letter of support from KFNA by December 3rd. Kress confirmed later that the property is zoned R5 – which would allow the 5th unit

Minutes completed by Joanna S. Hallstrom, NRP Project Organizer

Next Page →

Home
oem xp software buy oem mac soft replica mobile phones