urbanMSP

I saw two blocks of houses removed across from the Richfield Target/Home Depot, so I looked up this article from last year.

Its nice that Bloomington Ave now connects directly (now I don't have to brave Cedar Ave to stock up on Tide and Kleenex), but at the cost of 12 homes it looks like a big waste.

http://current.mnsun.com/2013/11/parkwa ... richfield/

Yet one house on 17th remained as of last week.

I think that's one of the two or three houses that was determined to be suitable for moving.

I would argue those 12 homes were sunk the minute that shopping center opened. Such a poorly conceived area. I feel like a bit of a hypocrite though, because I shop there often.

I die a little inside every time I shop here (especially when it's before or after a trip to MOA) or when I shop at the Rosedale Super Target.

But I digress, this isn't Urbanist confessions.

Is stuff just moving in closer to Minneapolis? The Target and Home Depot in Richfield are nice and new. The ones in Bloomington off 494 are languishing.

I think this area draws a lot of people in from south Minneapolis, which is nice. Although it makes me wish that Minneapolis could just start annexing suburbs.

I guess I feel less guilty shopping here than in Roseville, because here I'm at least paying Hennepin county tax rather than Ramsey county tax.

I would argue those 12 homes were sunk the minute that shopping center opened. Such a poorly conceived area. I feel like a bit of a hypocrite though, because I shop there often.

Maybe some of the forum members who are involved in Richfield planning can chime in, but I'm pretty sure the thing that sunk these homes was the building of MSP runway 17-35 a decade ago. Keep in mind there used to be an entire neighborhood, an elementary school, golf course, etc east of Cedar at 66th. I remember golfing on that par 3 when I was a kid, which was not too long ago.

The SuperTarget/Home Depot land use was considered to be more of an airport buffer than having homes right up against Cedar/18th. In general, it's been a good thing, but I feel bad for the homes on the west side of 17th that were in limbo for years. Also, Richfield needs to stand up for itself and demand better urbanism. The faux new urbanist strip malls along 66th have things like gas meters and fire exits facing 66th and the stores are oriented towards Target. My only other wish for this area would have been to have the Target and Home Depot in different places. Because of the parcel layout and the ramp from 77 to 66th St, the Home Depot parking lot is much deeper than the Target parking lot. Yet Target has much higher traffic and parking demand. Switching the two would have helped possibly set the stage for outlot development that hopefully would front Richfield Parkway so it could be an urban commercial street on both sides.

The parking lot imbalance and design of the buildings facing 66th are my main issue with that shopping center. It also took a long time for the smaller tenants to get in. It's mostly full now, but took 4-5 years.

I also wonder how that Home Depot is doing relative to other locations - it always seems significantly less busy than several other locations even on the weekend.

Why is Richfield so dilapidated looking? Driving down 66th street feels like driving through Bosnia.

Why is Richfield so dilapidated looking? Driving down 66th street feels like driving through Bosnia.

Drama much?
Richfield is a post-WWI community. It has rows and rows of homes built quickly and cheaply, but that doesn't mean they are dilapidated! Where do you live? Do you own a house? If so, I highly doubt you'd enjoy someone calling your investment 'dilapidated'. Richfield is full of first-time home owners. Those little houses are cute, have tons of character, and 66th is a pretty darn good traffic calculator through the northern part of the city. I love 66th - and all the unique business along it. My fish store, great Mexican markets, the Hub. It may not be 'perfect' but it's the lovely Richfield.

The commercial areas are pretty dilapidated. The houses are not really any worse off than most of the ones in adjacent South Minneapolis. There are some unsightly features (like, there are fewer alleys, so a lot of cars parked in front-facing driveways) -- but that's more an issue of design than current condition. There's actually been a moderate amount of teardown homes; nothing like Edina, but I can count 5 or so within walking distance of my home in Richfield that have been done in the last couple years. Some are great, beautiful assets to the community (check out 7229 1st Av S if you're in the area). Others look like they were transplanted from Savage.

Regarding Richfield Parkway/Bloomington -- only one or two homes were actually in the way of the street. The rest is being cleared for more airport-compatible redevelopment. I have mixed feelings, but most homeowners were eager to get out, and got more than market value for their home.

What's more egregious that Richfield plans to tear down about 20 homes to further widen 66th Street west of 35W...

I think that's one of the two or three houses that was determined to be suitable for moving.

Turns out I was totally wrong. This very house was getting demolished on Friday when I stopped at Home Depot.

Also, the stretch of Richfield Parkway that was still the old two-lane street is closed off and torn up at the moment, presumably to complete the parkway-ification that's been done on either end.

Also, the stretch of Richfield Parkway that was still the old two-lane street is closed off and torn up at the moment, presumably to complete the parkway-ification that's been done on either end.

Yes. The new lighting and median will go in the central section, and that segment of the Intercity Regional Trail will be completed along the west side. Will connect through Taft Park up to Lake Nokomis, and down along the Old Cedar corridor through Richfield.

Why is Richfield so dilapidated looking? Driving down 66th street feels like driving through Bosnia.

Drama much?
Richfield is a post-WWI community. It has rows and rows of homes built quickly and cheaply, but that doesn't mean they are dilapidated! Where do you live? Do you own a house? If so, I highly doubt you'd enjoy someone calling your investment 'dilapidated'. Richfield is full of first-time home owners. Those little houses are cute, have tons of character, and 66th is a pretty darn good traffic calculator through the northern part of the city. I love 66th - and all the unique business along it. My fish store, great Mexican markets, the Hub. It may not be 'perfect' but it's the lovely Richfield.

Sorry. Did not mean to offend. The homes themselves are nice. I was referring to the condition of the street itself, and some of the commercial areas that look blighted, not the houses. Also there is lack of boulevard trees between the street and sidewalk, which looks really bad, but I see they are slowly fixing that along new streets. It seems things are getting revamped along Lyndale and Cedar and I look forward to continued improvements.

What's more egregious that Richfield plans to tear down about 20 homes to further widen 66th Street west of 35W...

Richfield is going to widen 66th Street west of I-35W to 3 lanes in each direction?! I have to say that I'm not sure I understand that decision. I mean traffic is heavy in both directions between I-35 and essentially York Avenue in Edina, but not so incredibly slow that it warrants widening the street. Perhaps a lot has changed since I've last been in the area (used to live near there 3+ years ago).

It's not going to be 3 lanes in each direction, but it's going to be completely stroadified (Hennepin County style) unless we get to them.

Well that's really disappointing. Richfield has a lot of potential. They should take a cue from Edina and Minneapolis; those places are making great strides with walkability and bicycling.

Richfield is going to widen 66th Street west of I-35W to 3 lanes in each direction?! I have to say that I'm not sure I understand that decision.

Not three lanes in both directions, but adding a median/center turn lane. The current road is mostly four lanes, undivided. East of Nicollet, it will be narrowed to three lane (with middle lane as median in some cases). West of Nicollet, they want to make the five-lane design continuous.

Richfield has a lot of potential. They should take a cue from Edina and Minneapolis; those places are making great strides with walkability and bicycling.

In defense of Richfield, I actually think we're generally a step or two ahead of Edina with streets. Although both cities suffer from lack of sidewalks, Richfield has far fewer instances of no sidewalks on high-traffic streets. Richfield has much better continuity, and is fortunate not to have any streets quite as awful as France or York Ave through the Southdale district. Both cities are bronze Bicycle Friendly Communities, and on a pretty similar page with bicycling -- although Richfield stands to complete 80% of its Bicycle Master Plan by 2020.

However, I do agree that Edina has tended to be a step ahead of Richfield with regard to high-quality, mixed-use development. Richfield has a terrible habit of just taking anything and everything it can get, regardless of where it fits into the plans or what it does for the community. (See O'Reilly Auto Parts on E 66th St, CVS on 66th and Penn, Aldi on Penn, Menards and Taco Bell in the "vibrant urban village" along 494/5.)

To be fair, much of the width of the road is being increased by adding bicycle lanes, boulevards, and wider sidewalks. They are also adding a center turn lane/median lane.East of Nicollet, there will be one lane each way plus the center lane, and west of Nicollet there will be two through lanes and a center lane. Certainly it isn't ideal to widen 66th east of Nicollet to 5 lanes, but I think it is justifiable considering the traffic volumes during peak hours.

Proposed cross-sections: http://www.cityofrichfield.org/modules/ ... entid=4917

I suppose I'd have a different view if Richfield (and Edina and far South Minneapolis, for that matter) where more proactive in allowing higher densities and more mixed-uses that are transit supportable in the corridor, but I believe that is probably not realistic (at least in the short-term).