My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017.10.24 WS
NewBrighton
>
Council
>
Packets
>
2017
>
2017.10.24 WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2018 5:29:16 PM
Creation date
1/5/2018 5:03:44 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
New Brighton Comprehensive Plan Phase 2 Community Engagement Summary <br />24 October 2017 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />for a month and a half in the fall of 2017. In total, 115 community members took the survey and <br />provided comments on New Brighton 2040 redevelopment concepts and idea cards. <br />The main takeaways from the online survey were: <br />» In general, the redevelopment concepts were received positively, with the Civic Center <br />redevelopment concept getting the most positive responses. <br />» Comments on redevelopment concepts seemed to fall into two general categories: <br />− There was a set of commenters who were enthusiastic about possible changes <br />within the city. Many of these commenters indicated they would like to see <br />positive changes in New Brighton to make it stand out within the Twin Cities. <br />− The other set of commenters who would not like to see any change within New <br />Brighton. These commenters generally indicated that they like New Brighton as it <br />is, and don’t want it to become more populated, or change significantly. <br />» Redevelopment, especially those concepts involving additional housing, raised concerns <br />of traffic within the city. There’s a perception of too much traffic already in the city, but it <br />is unknown how much traffic is from New Brighton, and how much are people from <br />surrounding areas trying to avoid congestion on I-35W. Redevelopment at important <br />nodes within the city should be seen as opportunities to research and perhaps address <br />traffic and safety issues. <br />» Parks Amenities and the Greenway system were identified as both being ideas that <br />should be the highest priority for the City as well as should have the most active role by <br />the City to achieve. <br />» The idea with the lowest priority was the Suburban Co-Working Space; survey <br />respondents also indicated that the city should take a more reactive than proactive <br />approach for that idea. These responses make sense, as this idea could be led by the <br />private sector, be more market-driven, and thus have less involvement from the city. <br />» Safety and connections for pedestrians and bicyclists were the most common type of <br />comments throughout the survey. The need for an inter-connected city for non-motorized <br />transportation was highlighted as an important issue by many commenters. <br />» Many comments desired a greater level of detail and greater involvement in the planning <br />process. It should be noted that these concepts were very general in nature. They were <br />developed to illustrate possible ideas and directions, rather than specific proposals. <br />Ultimately, any real projects will require more detailed planning, analysis, and community <br />engagement. <br />The following charts provide a high-level overview of general responses from the survey: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.