Minnesota Independence Community College (MICC) presented a concept design April 22 for a two-story learning center on a site at 70 Sixth Street in Richfield, proposing demolition of four single-family homes the organization owns and a replat that would create two parcels: a western parcel for the MICC facility and an eastern parcel preserved for future development, possibly up to about eight housing units.

“A MICC is an organization that has been in Richfield for 29 years,” Amy Godmastad, MICC chief executive officer, told the council as she introduced the project. Mark Forsberg and Scott Aspenson of RSP Architects laid out a design that centers a reception and “welcome” zone on the first floor, classrooms and a teaching kitchen, and staff offices on the second floor. The building massing was pushed close to the street to create an active street edge and preserve site area for shared parking and future housing.

The project team described operational details and site strategy: push the building toward the street for activation and transit access, place parking to the north and shield it from the public right-of-way, retain stormwater in underground systems to preserve surface area and support future uses, and locate the front door adjacent to a bus stop to facilitate transit access for MICC participants who rely on public transportation. RSP said the preliminary parking count is roughly 39–40 stalls for the MICC facility; that parking could be shared with any future housing on the eastern parcel.

Councilmembers and planning commissioners gave preliminary feedback rather than taking action. Comments and requests included: adding sidewalks to the property edge, providing a privacy fence on the north property line adjacent to neighbors, considering bird-friendly glazing and window frits for glass areas, and evaluating whether the site should be rezoned from the comprehensive-plan medium-density designation to a higher-density designation to allow denser housing in the future. Several council members praised the design and asked that the applicant consider adding the optional future parking now to reduce future disruption.

Planning staff said a school is a conditional use in the MR2 district and that the proposed use would not require a subsidy; the applicant confirmed there is no subsidy anticipated. The project team said they will continue to refine schematic design and take the council and planning commission feedback into account before returning to the city for the formal land-use process, including any required conditional-use permit, replat and building-permit reviews.

Ending: The council offered direction and comments but did not take action; staff noted items for follow-up and the applicant will refine design details and return to the city for formal land-use applications.