Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-20-19 BID MinutesDowntown Business Improvement District Board Meeting Minutes February 20, 2019 Attending: Eric Bowman, Ileana Indreland, Susan Neubauer, Eric Sutherland, Jeff Krauss, Chris Naumann Absent: Mike Basile, Jolee Berry, Erik Nelson, Public Comments: None Minutes ACTION: Eric Sutherland moved to approve the October, November, and January minutes as presented. Susan Neubauer seconded the motion. All voted in favor. Finance Report None presented Executive Directors Report None presented Discussion and Decision Item Downtown Plan Recommendation (related document attached below) Chris reminded the board of their review of the Downtown Plan rough draft at last month’s meeting. He pointed out that the formal draft, released February 1st , only had two notable changes: the NCOD recommendation (refer to memo sent February 8, 2019) and the building height recommendation. Chris presented an overview of those two changes and a detailed look at the recommended minimum parking requirements. The revised NCOD recommendation calls for downtown, as defined by the B3 zoning boundary, to be recognized as its own distinct ‘neighborhood’ within the NCOD with a specific set of downtown design guidelines. The building height recommendation is to allow up to 7 floors with all floors above the 4th floor to be stepped back on all sides with street frontage. Chris presented the recommended minimum parking requirements as follows providing existing development examples showing similar outcomes in terms of the number of spaces. The basis of these recommendations is to extremely simplify the calculations by reducing the number of land use categories from 20+ to 3 and eliminating all the discounts and reductions. The Plan recommends eliminating all parking requirements within the “core area” which is defined in the UDC as Grand to Rouse between the alleys on either side of Main Street. In other words, Chris said, there would be no requirements in the heart of the Main Street Historic District. Recommended residential requirements include: 0.5 space per studio; 0.75 per 1-bedroom; 1.0 per 2-bedroom; and 1.5 per 3-bedroom. Hotel requirement would be 0.6 space per room. All commercial uses would be 1 space per 1000 gross square feet. Eric Bowman said he would like to hear any public comment before discussing the specifics. Mike Hope said he was not against simplifying the parking code but seems more strategic than tactical…we have real parking problems…we talk about building more parking, but we need to figure out how to pay for new parking…businesses and property owners need to help pay for parking with an SID. David Loseff said growth is happening…we can live without the Element, Etha or 5 West, but we cannot live without parking…the Parking Commission is making irreversible policies based on bad data…cannot over encumber the parking we already have. Ashley Ogle said neighborhoods provide extra parking for downtown but is getting a lot of pressure. If the residents get a parking permit district it will restrict overflow parking thus pushing the parking demand some where else, but where…need to find a balance between long-term and short-term parking at the garage. Paul Neubauer said it was good to hear property and business owners have concerns about parking not just residents…would like to see both studio and 1-bedroom residential units require 0.75 parking spaces. Ileana Indreland said it was helpful to hear from three other property owners. She said the BID should request a statement be added to the Downtown Plan that we need a strategic plan to expand and fund new parking. Eric Bowman added that we need to make sure we discuss and vet each recommendation in the Downtown Plan fully before implementation. Susan Neubauer said we need to correlate the Downtown Plan with on the ground issues such as how to pay for additional parking. Eric Sutherland pointed out that the City has smartened up some parking regulations like the recent increase of the Cash-in-Lieu of Parking fee from $5000 to $25,000. The board asked Chris to draft some language for the BID board to consider at their March board meeting capturing their recommended modification to the Downtown Plan. The modification would address the need for a strategic parking plan to balance the utilization of existing parking; expanding parking inventory; and funding future parking. **Meeting was adjourned at 1:15pm** DRAFT DOWNTOWN PLAN Additional Details Prepared by: Chris Naumann Downtown Bozeman Partnership 222 East Main Street #302 406-586-4008 chris@downtownbozeman.org PARKING RECOMMENDATIONS Manage and regulate parking to ensure appropriate access and balanced supply. 1. Unlock Existing Spaces: Simplify Parking Code Requirements & Encourage Shared Parking 2. Create More Choices: Expanding Access to Multi-modal Transportation Options 3. Expand Parking: Add On-street Parking & Structured Parking • Minimum Parking Requirements. Simplify the math. Currently there are over 20 land-use categories with specified parking requirements and six types of reductions that can be applied to the calculation of a project’s parking requirement. The Plan recommends three land-use types and no reductions. o Recommended Commercial Requirements  0.6 parking spaces per hotel room  1 parking space per 1000 sqft for all commercial uses o Recommended Residential Parking Requirements to promote smaller units and enable more diverse supply  Studio unit – 0.5 spaces  1-bedroom unit - 0.75 spaces  2-bedroom unit – 1 space  3-bedroom unit – 1.5 spaces • Eliminate all parking requirements in the core area. The UDC defines the ‘core area’ as: Main Street from Grand to Rouse and to the alleys one-half block north and south from Main Street. HOTEL—Current Minimum Parking Requirement Calculation Example Actual calculations for Element Hotel with current code requirements Rooms 1.1 spaces per Employees 1 space per Subtotal Reductions Total Spaces 104 114 16 16 130 55% 60 Element Hotel with 2019 Downtown Plan Recommended Minimum Parking Requirements Rooms 0.6 space per Total Spaces 104 62 62 For comparison sake, here is a hospitality industry standard for estimating hotel parking demand Rooms Occupancy Rate Occupied Rooms Personal Car Rate Needed Spaces 104 85% 88 75% 66 RESIDENTIAL—Current Parking Minimum Parking Requirement Calculation Example Actual Parking Calculations for Block M at existing “one space per unit” requirement Unit Type Number of Units Number of Spaces 3-bedroom 18 18 1-bedroom 6 6 Studio 12 12 36 total spaces Block M with 2019 Downtown Plan Recommended Minimum Parking Requirements Unit Type Number of Units Number of Spaces 3-bedroom @ 1.5/unit 18 27 1-bedroom @ 0.75/unit 6 4.5 Studio @ 0.5/unit 12 6 38 total spaces RESIDENTIAL—Current Parking Minimum Parking Requirement Calculation Example Actual Parking Calculations for the revised/approved Black Olive at existing “one space per unit” requirement Unit Type Number of Units Number of Spaces 2-bedroom 28 28 1-bedroom 19 19 47 total units 47 total spaces Parking calculations for original proposed Black Olive at requirements recommended by 2019 Downtown Plan Unit Type Number of Units Number of Spaces 1-bedroom @ 0.75/unit 56 42 56 total units 42 total spaces COMMERCIAL—Current Minimum Parking Requirement Calculation Example From informal concept review for 106 East Babcock (former BSWB building) 24 separate calculations including: • Adjusting net square footage from gross square footage for each area/floor • Factoring 6 reductions (B3, 1st 3000sqft, structured parking, transit, bike, SID) 2019 Downtown Plan recommended minimum parking calculation for the same proposed development at 106 East Babcock (former BSWB building). Total Building Gross Square Footage Blended Commercial Parking Calculation Minimum Required Parking Spaces 49,000 1 per 1000sf gross 49 BUILDING HEIGHTS Reinforce Downtown as the city center, through new and existing buildings of urban density, considerable height and a diverse mix of uses. • Planning for Growth & Future Projected Development o Housing: 400 to 800 new units by 2045 o Office: 250,000 to 350,000 new square feet by 2045 o Retail & Restaurant: curate the mix and support the success of the existing businesses Design new buildings for sustainability, durability and design excellence. • Encourage a Mix of Scales o Align Downtown Building Heights with Community Plan  Three- to seven-stories with upper floors (5-7) stepping back o Maintain sensitive transitions between adjacent residential zones The draft Community Plan includes a vision statement about ‘the shape of our city’: “The shape of our City is defined by our three- to seven-story skyline, streetscapes, and the spectacular natural landscapes that surround us.” Unlike the 2009 Downtown Plan, which called for the tallest buildings to be downtown, the 2019 Plan recognizes that it is important for several mixed-use districts to have the “tallest” buildings, but downtown must be one of those districts. The most important aspect of allowing slightly taller buildings downtown is to address the initial height at the street frontage, often called the ‘street wall’. Jan Gehl’s seminal urban planning book Cities for People establishes that human contact between a building and the street is possible within the first 45 feet of height and beyond that contact is lost. Therefore, the Downtown Plan recommends all buildings taller than 4 floors (45’) must ‘step back’ the upper floors. In other words, this creates a height transition between the street and the building like the transition we currently have between B3 buildings and R2 houses (see below). The goal is to allow more height and density without negatively impacting the human experience from the street and sidewalk. Gehl summarizes this, “the challenge is to build splendid cities at eye height with tall buildings rising above the beautiful lower stories”. NCOD & HISTORIC PRESERVATION Design new buildings for sustainability, durability and design excellence. • Encourage a Mix of Scales o Maintain sensitive transitions between adjacent residential zones The Downtown Plan offers a much-improved diagram (below) illustrating the existing B3-R# transition requirements. Protect the character of the Main Street Historic District and enhance the residential neighborhoods through context-sensitive development. • Strengthen Downtown Character Areas o Wallace Avenue--Celebrate Industrial Heritage o Rouse Avenue--Create a Civic Gateway o Black Avenue--Imagine as Downtown’s Biking Hub o Grand Avenue--Expand as the Cultural Arts Heart • Historic Districts and Protected Character • Keep Investing in Great Streets and Enliven the Alleys Design new buildings for sustainability, durability and design excellence. • Define Downtown’s Distinct Design Character o Recognize Downtown as a distinct and independent ‘neighborhood’ within the NCOD o Create a specific set of Downtown Design Guidelines As I presented in my memo to the board (dated February 8), I think the revised NCOD recommendations in the Downtown Plan will clarify the past ambiguity about how the design and historic preservation guidelines apply to the downtown B3 district. As a distinct ‘neighborhood’ within the NCOD with a set of unique design guidelines, downtown will be able to further evolve as Bozeman’s most dynamic mixed- use district—honoring the past while embracing the future.