Loading...
EDA Minutes 04-25-2017 (Special Meeting)MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) Tuesday, April 25, 2017 — 5:00 p.m. Academy Room, Monticello Community Center Present: Bill Demeules, Steve Johnson, Tracy Hinz, Lloyd Hilgart, and Jim Davidson Absent: Bill Tapper, Jon Morphew Other: Andrew Dresdner, Jena Stanton (Cuningham Group) and Thomas Leighton (Tangible Consulting) Staff: Jeff O'Neill, Angela Schumann, Jim Thares, and Wayne Oberg 1. Call to Order Bill Demueles called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call 3. Small Area Study Presentation Andrew Dresdner introduced his team and started his presentation by explaining the four main goals of the study. These goals included: shifting the center and holding onto Broadway as the main street, engaging the river, improving the Pine Street experience for all, and infilling lots with several small, a few medium, and one or two large investment projects. Dresdner stated that the recommendation along Pine Street was to be primarily a commercial street where buildings would be located on the corners as much as possible. Improved pedestrian accessibility (including refuges), shared parking in the center of the block, and buffered parking were proposed. The scale of the buildings would be one to three story buildings. The recommendation was also to reduce access to properties from Pine Street by only allowing access on side streets. Dresdner explained that development should focus on quarter block improvements at a time. Dresdner then discussed the proposed objectives on Walnut Street and Cedar Street. A priority was to infill vacant lots with in -town housing (two/three story apartments or townhomes) with tuck under or surface level parking. He suggested curb extensions on both sides of Broadway Street at the intersections of Cedar Street and Walnut Street, a four-way stop sign at Broadway Street and Walnut Street, and/or continuing a one lane road going west for one additional block from the intersection of Highway 25 and Broadway Street. Lloyd Hilgart commented if an extension of the one lane on Broadway Street would occur that angled parking could also be included in this area. Dresdner also suggested punching Walnut Street all the way through to River Street. The idea was that Walnut Street from Broadway Street to River Street could be occasionally closed for festivals or markets. This proposal would improve circulation around the lot and attract new development. Next, Dresdner discussed concepts for Broadway Street. He stated that it was important to keep the small mercantile scale with as many storefronts and doors on Broadway Street. Tom Leighton stated they completed a retail vitality study on Broadway Street and compared it to neighboring communities. They found out that Broadway Street had more store -fronts than any of the examples. Dresdner also explained that the empty lots on Broadway Street be constructed into public parklets for things such as seating. He suggested keeping parking along Broadway Street to keep people interested in downtown and to buffer pedestrian walkways. He also suggested that the service type businesses migrate upstairs or off of the main street and to focus on retail and restaurants in this area. He stated that service businesses don't generate as much people as do retail or restaurant facilities. Dresdner than discussed River Street and the riverfront. He illustrated two medium development opportunities for Block 52. With development including outdoor dining facility overlooking the river and signature architecture would be seen crossing the bridge. He also discussed replacing the playground at West Bridge Park with an amphitheater. A splash pad was also proposed along Walnut Street. Steve Johnson had concerns with decreasing the street volume on Broadway Street and the amount of vehicle backup that would occur. He asked the consultants to consider calculations for parking per density in the completed plan. He also noted concerns with visible parking. Johnson asked if the consultants would consider amending the building setbacks. Dresdner confirmed with that the vision was to be a maximum setback of 10 to 15 feet from the property line. Leighton commented that on a previous community's plan, the buildings were set back 20 feet, which provide ideal locations for outdoor seating or outdoor retail space that would attract people and liveliness in the downtown. Steve Johnson mentioned concerns about taking away parking on the south side of Broadway with having a proposed left hand turn lane. Jeff O'Neill stated that at this time the County Engineers are not proposing any changes to the intersection of Broadway and Highway 25 due to the relatively short duration of high traffic during peak times. O'Neill asked the consultants to explain the proposed experience for people driving into Monticello from across the bridge. Dresdner expressed that it was important to keep the signal at River Street so that people know they are entering downtown. He hoped that circulation would be easy with pedestrian accessibility to the park and a place where people would be outside, which encourage people to explore the downtown. O'Neill expressed excitement for the proposal, noting that it's difficult to see the park from the bridge until after driving past it. The board and the consultants discussed the importance of having additional opportunities for residential development in the downtown. Steve Johnson asked the consultants to talk about Block 34. Dresdner noted that Block 34 2 was complicated because of two wells that do not allow structures to be built within 50 feet of it. Dresdner proposed three development phases for this block. Steve Johnson asked who would own shared parking lots throughout the proposals. Dresdner responded that it would be a case-by-case basis, but suggested that it be public parking. Charlotte Gabler asked for clarification on the developer interviews. Leighton responded that the developers are provided background, opportunities, and challenges of the downtown. They were also asked if they would consider developing in the city and the type and scale to their potential development. Gabler expressed a possible concern of distinguishing the city during these interviews, but added that it might give an edge to Monticello that they are interested in changing the downtown. Leighton stated that he believed three or four high quality developments in the downtown could occur in the next 5 to 10 years under the right circumstances. Leighton discussed the advantages about having a TIF District in place. He explained the support and lower risk it would provide to prospective developers. O'Neill commented that this study helped to understand that there is opportunity for housing in the downtown including mixed-use. Hilgart asked if there were specific developers that target downtowns for redevelopment and if they had any specific users that they take with them to these developments. Leighton responded that it was less common for developers to have specific retailers in their back pocket, but that it was very common that if they are putting retail space in a development that they would identify possible or anchor tenants. In the case of a brew pub or restaurant, a developer would likely want to have the tenant or owner identified to build to their needs. Leighton discussed concerns with attracting and locating non - national businesses. The board then moved on to discuss pedestrian flow in the downtown. Dresdner noted that the volume of traffic was not the issue on Highway 25, but rather the speed. Schumann asked if the EDA felt they had a clear understanding of how the EDA properties would be involved with the proposed plan and if they were supportive. Davidson commented that it was more realistic plan because of a mix of housing and other developments. Tracy Hinz explained that Block 34 was still perplexing. Leighton agreed that the block was tricky, but suggested that development occur in phases starting with the corner of the block. Per the goals of the study to move the downtown to Walnut Street, Hinz asked about having public art on Walnut Street, rather than at the corner of Block 34 as approved at a previous EDA meeting. Schumann stated that with the art place grant, the artist was working on focusing on Walnut Street. As the current liquor store is running out of room, Hilgart suggested moving it to Block 34 with other businesses such as the DMV and Chamber of Commerce. Leighton 3 entertained the idea because of the traffic flow. A splash pad idea was also discussed and concerns with maintenance. Dresdner noted that a Public Meeting would occur on May 31St. 4. Adiourn STEVE JOHNSON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 6:28 P.M. TRACY HINZ SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. Recorder: Jacob Thunander pff— Approved: May 10, 2017 Attest: 'im hares, Economic Development Director 4