EDA Minutes 06-21-2017 (Workshop Meeting)MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA)
Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 — 6:00 p.m.
Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Bill Demeules, Bill Tapper, Steve Johnson, Tracy Hinz, Jon Morphew, Jim Davidson,
Lloyd Hilgart
Staff Present: Jim Thares, Jeff O'Neill, Angela Schumann, Jacob Thunander
1. Call to Order
Bill Demueles called the meeting of the EDA to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. Consideration of additional agenda items
None.
4. Consent Agenda
Not -applicable.
Regular Business
5. Consideration of Adopting Downtown Small Area Study Plan
Andrew Dresdner, Cuningham Group, provided a video to begin his presentation of the
Small Area Study plan. The tour started with broadly explaining proposals for Pine
Street, Walnut and Cedar Street, the riverfront area, and Broadway Street. Dresdner noted
that three main features regarding implementation include: catalytic sites, public realm
improvements, and retail vitality strategies.
Dresdner then talked about specific features and answered questions that have been
commonly posed. He noted that the ideas and concepts were developed from public
input, developer and market context and input, existing City policies and plans, and
proven town -building strategies.
Dresdner explained the relationship and difference from the Embracing Downtown plan.
He said that if adopted, the Small Area Study would be an update for the core downtown
and would require a comprehensive plan amendment. The plan also accounts for and
explains changes in the retail marketplace and in downtown markets. It also talks less
about "shopping" and more about "experience", has less reliance on large projects and
large property assembly, contains more support for the traditional form of Broadway, and
promotes more types of development (from a place based approach).
Dresdner than ran through the goals of the plan, which included: shifting the center and
holding onto Broadway as the Main Street; engaging the river; improving the Pine Street
experience for all; and infilling with lots of small investments, a few medium sized, and
one or two large ones.
Dresdner also mentioned that there have been concerns regarding traffic. He explained
that the six block study focus could not solve the regional traffic problems that exists.'
Dresdner stated that the plan provides support for another river crossing; favors slower
speeds and accepts volumes; and promotes traffic calming measures
The next topic of noted concern was with parking. Dresdner noted that the Small Area
Study recommends clear signage and wayfinding and a parking district policy.
Dresdner also explained about plans for EDA and other public properties in the
downtown including Block 34 and Block 52.
Bill Demueles observed that the plan uses "Pine Street" rather than "Highway 25".
Dresdner responded that the wording was not intentional. Demueles questioned whether
there would be confusion.
Bill Tapper asked what the impact of Fallon Avenue overpass would be to the plan.
Dresdner stated that more network is better and that more people would begin taking
Fallon Avenue. Tapper also noted concerns with the quarter block strategy. Dresdner
stated that that scale was used because it is human scale, provides variety, is small
(changes every 150 feet), and keeps with how downtown has been developing. Thomas
Leighton, Tangible Consulting, added that the plan does not prescribe that development
must occur on a quarter block basis.
Steve Johnson stated that the concepts were good, but he was concerned with the details
imicromanaging development and not allowing flexibility. He also mentioned concerns
with parking in downtown. Johnson stated he talked with a developer, who noted that the
plan was too restrictive and did not give enough flexibility to the market place. Johnson
questioned whether economic forces or the government should lead development.
Johnson also mentioned traffic congestion concerns that would not be resolved by the
plan. He suggested a workshop meeting to discuss the details of implementation of the
plan.
Lloyd Hilgart asked if the parking strategies would relocate the current two public lots, to
smaller lots. Dresdner confirmed and added on -street parking would also occur.
Steve Johnson suggested that the entire downtown be included as a Planned Unit
Development to achieve the goals of the plan and include the flexibility necessary for
development.
Angela Schumann stated that staff went into the planning study with the idea that the City
and the EDA own a lot of property in the downtown. Staff is responsible for relaying the
vision from the EDA to developers for what they would like to see in these areas.
2
Schumann explained that the Embracing Downtown plan wasn't suitable to answer some
of the questions today's developers had.
Jim Davidson stated that at this point, the plan would be used as a guideline. If there was
a policy change, it would go through the approval process as it occurs. Schumann stated
that was the process that the Embracing Downtown followed and noted that the
Comprehensive Plan is a guideline for development.
Tapper asked if any developers have expressed interest and if they could begin working
in Monticello. Leighton stated that he talked to developers who focus on smaller
communities and complete more `urban' style projects and senior housing projects. Both
of these developers responded positively and that they would be interested in learning
more about it and building the type of projects they typically complete.
Tracy Hinz followed up with that discussion and asked for more clarification on actions
taken to improve building conditions. She also commented that minimal interaction from
business owners and community members occurred, and was concerned with
implementation. Dresdner responded that he didn't think there was minimal involvement
from the public and noted the outreach occurred at the community center and the open
house. He also said that several businesses in the area were also contacted. Hinz
appreciated the efforts, but was struck by the low number of participants. She wished
there was more robust conversations with business owners at these stakeholder meetings.
Leighton provided a few areas of where the City could start its implementation focus.
Schumann also responded on the amount of public engagement that was sought for the
project. Schumann asked the consultant to include information gathered from the
stakeholder meetings to be added to the plan. Schumann also stated the importance of
ongoing engagement with stakeholders. She mentioned that by implementing this plan
and/or the Embracing Downtown Plan, the City would retain credibility and stay
engaged.
Johnson reiterated concerns for retail vitality and the economics, along with the rigidity
of the plan. Tapper agreed with many of Johnson's concerns. Tapper was also concerned
with businesses being able to locate in the downtown. Tapper was also interested in why
an amphitheater was proposed. Dresdner noted that all public improvements cost money,
but believed that some strategies could cost almost nothing and could be completed
quickly. He also stated that the amphitheater was reviewed by the Parks Commission and
staff. He stated that the reason for the reconfiguration was to get the heavy programing
closer to the core of the downtown. He also added that the park would likely be at the end
of its life by the end of the newly created plan. He explained that planning would need to
take place and that implementation of a new park would occur gradually.
Jon Morphew appreciated the breadth and depth of the report. He was skeptical of the
housing portion of the plan and with overall implementation. Dresdner explained the
importance of having housing in the downtown; retail and services will follow housing.
Schumann stated that an implementation workshop would be held to help with the
success of the plan. Dresdner added that later in July the meeting would occur to
understand who could assist with implementation. The steering committee would also be
involved in the implementation of the plan. Dresdner stated that it was not just the
responsibility for the EDA to lift the plan.
Demueles asked if there were any comments from the public.
Jeff O'Neill mentioned that from previous downtown plans, positive development has
occurred.
Demueles recognized and thanked the Steering Committee and the consultants for their
work with the plan
Steve Johnson requested sitting down with the Planning Commission to talk about the
details.
STEVE JOHNSON MOVED TO TABLE ACTION UNTIL FURTHER DISCUSSIONS
WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DISCUSS THE DETAILS OF
ACCEPTANCE OF THE SMALL AREA STUDY BEFORE FORWARDING TO CITY
BOARDS. BILL TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 6-1
WITH JIM DAVIDSON VOTING IN OPPOSITION.
Tapper added that he would like to see a simple objective/guideline statement of what
should occur in the downtown.
6. Consideration of GMEF Loan Guidelines Options
Jim Thares explained that the item was a follow up from the June 14"' workshop meeting.
He stated that Shred -N -Go submitted a GMEF application with less than the required ten
percent equity contribution. Thares stated in discussions with the EDA Attorney, she
suggested the guidelines could be changed to 5 to 10 percent.
Bill Demueles asked if a `minimum investment' could be another option.
Steve Johnson stated that by having a range would be superfluous as most applicants
would put five percent down.
Bill Demueles stated that project should have a minimum of $25,000 equity.
Jim Davidson asked what the rationale was behind changing the guidelines. Thares
explained that it would open up the fund to a larger amount of applicants. Demueles
added that it would be a lower risk to the City to lose a development project.
Lloyd Hilgart asked if instead of having a percentage, the language be amended to have
the EDA use discretion on the amount of equity to receive.
4
Steve Johnson stated that it would be a higher risk for the City to ask for a lower equity
rate. He suggested having changing interest rates depending on the amount of equity that
would be put down.
Tracy Hinz asked what the timeframe was for development for Shred -N -Go. Thares
responded that the City is waiting for a signed development agreement.
STEVE JOHNSON MOVED TO HAVE A 5 PERCENT EQUITY CONTRIBUTION
WITH A ONE PERCENT BELOW PRIME INTEREST RATE. LLOYD HILGART
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 7-0.
7. Consideration of Appointing EDA Member to Ellison Property Evaluation Sub -
Committee
Jim Thares stated that the item was considered at the June 14"' Meeting, but however due
to attendance, the EDA tabled action.
BILL DEMUELES MOVED TO APPOINT EDA COMMISSIONER TRACY HINZ TO
THE ELLISON PROPERTY SUB -COMMITTEE. JON MORPHEW SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 7-0.
Adjourn
TRACY HINZ MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:46 PM. STEVE
JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 7-0.
Recorder: Jacob Thunander
Approved: July 11, 2017
Attest:�w
Jii hares, Executive Director