Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-26-19 Downtown URD Minutes Downtown Urban Renewal District Board Meeting Minutes November 26, 2019 Attending: Bobby Bear, Jeff Krauss, Cory Lawrence, Marley McKenna, Tony Renslow, Nick Zelver, Chris Naumann, Emily Cope Absent: Bill Stoddart Public Comment: None Minutes ACTION: Cory Lawrence moved to approve the October minutes as presented. Tony Renslow seconded the motion. All voted in favor. Financial Report Chris presented the finance report for Fiscal Year 2020. He noted that the starting balance is at $2,145,000 after the final year-end revenues for FY19 were finalized. There was additional income of $3338 from an insurance claim paying for replacement of a streetlamp that was hit by a vehicle. He highlighted previous month’s expenses as follows: $37,015 for North Black Pocket Park completion, $2492 for fiber engineering design, $10,500 for a Technical Assistance Grant for the Gallatin Laundry building, $787 for Groundprint Consulting, $923 for structured parking feasibility analysis. The board did not have any financial questions. Executive Director’s Report Technical Assistance Program Update Two grants have been awarded in FY2020. Two grants remain open from FY2019. One grant remains from FY2018 for the Osborne Building. Date Project Name Project Address Applicant Professional Type Value 4/16/2018 Osborne Building 233 East Main Street Casey Durham Locati Arch Plan/Façade 10,500$ Total 10,500$ Date Project Name Project Address Applicant Professional Type Value 8/20/2018 BSWB Building 106 East Babcock Randy Scully Intrinsik Planning 7,500$ 4/24/2019 I-Ho's Restaurant 323 West Main Derik Pomeroy Architecture 118 Planning 7,500$ Total 15,000$ Date Project Name Project Address Applicant Professional Type Value 10/7/2019 Gallatin Laundry 137 East Babcock St Robert Lateiner Think Tank Plan/Façade 10,500$ 11/1/2019 9 E Main Street 9 E Main Street Robert Lateiner Think Tank Façade 3,000$ Total 10,500$ Technical Assistance Program FY2018 Report Technical Assistance Program FY2019 Report Technical Assistance Program FY2020 Report Other Financial Program Updates Streetscape Grants: None Hotel Incentive Grant: Armory Hotel-Pending Life-Safety Grants: None Fiber Connectivity Grant: None Building Project Updates Armory Hotel Substantial completion scheduled for January 31, 2019 and opening in April 2020. Black & Olive Apartments under construction to be completed December 2019 Osborne Building (233 East Main) 4-story mixed use building with 2 floors of restaurant use and 2 floors of offices. Construction began October 2018. “OSM” Building 5 story mixed use building proposed on southwest corner of Babcock and Wallace—construction began Spring 2019 One 11 Lofts (corner of North Willson and West Lamme) 50-unit apartment building with 53 parking spaces. Construction began spring 2019. Merin Condos (on North Bozeman across from Dave’s Sushi) 28 units of owner-occupied housing. In Final Site Plan review. Village Downtown 30 new residential condo units and 9 single-family lots are under review by the City AC Hotel (5 East Mendenhall) 6 story 140 room full-service hotel. In development review. East End Flats (240 East Mendenhall) 6-story mixed use project. In development review. Veranda Apartments (111 South Church) proposed new construction of 6 units. New Businesses Update • Good Food Company—229 East Main—restaurant to open in Osborne Building • Blackbird Kitchen—140 East Main—former C. Moose—expansion under construction • TBD—544 East Main—formerly Heeb’s • TBD—2 East Main—former Miller’s Jewelry location • TBD—9 East Main—formerly Sassy Sisters • Voormi Clothing—17 East Main—formerly Sun Dog Gallery—OPEN Planning Updates In this section, I will provide update about several ongoing City planning processes. Community Plan (City Growth Policy) Update Consultants: Logan Simpson (Ft. Collins) Update: Draft Plan has not been publicly released. December 3rd - Community Plan Open House 4-6 PM in the City Hall Commission Room https://www.bozeman.net/city-projects/bozeman-community-plan-update NCOD and Design Guidelines Update Consultants: Bendon Adams Consulting (Aspen, CO) and Orion Planning (Missoula, MT) Update: Final Document was released in August 2019. https://www.bozeman.net/city-projects/ncod-review Community Housing Action Plan Consultants: Navigate, LLC Workforce Housing Solutions Update: The draft Community Housing action plan was released in late October. The City Commission began their review of the draft on November 18th. https://www.bozeman.net/city-projects/community-housing-action-plan https://www.bozeman.net/city-projects/community-housing-needs-assessment FEMA Floodplain Map Next Steps: The final draft map will be released in 2nd quarter of 2020. The City then has 180 days to amend its floodplain regulations to incorporate the new maps. The new regulatory floodplain map would become effective by the beginning of 2021. TIF Bond Refinancing The City Finance Director is refinancing the downtown URD TIF bond which is anticipated to reduce the annual debt service payment for the garage by $35,000 to $45,000. North Black Pocket Park Construction of the North Black Pocket Park in southwest corner of Black Lot public parking lot is making significant progress. The project includes three elements: new pocket park; relocated Black Lot egress; and new streetscape including sidewalk, streetlamps, and trees. AV Construction began work the week of August 19th. Below is a basic construction schedule: • 8/19—8/21 Mobilization and site preparations • 8/21—9/11 Demo and excavation • 9/3—10/11 Concrete and electrical installation—delayed due to weather • 10/14—10/28 Hardscaping and lighting installation • 11/1—11/16 Benches and Red Chair installation • Spring 2020 Landscaping installation MDT Rouse Project Negotiations continue with Montana Department of Transportation to have downtown streetlamps installed along Rouse Avenue between Main and East Lamme Streets next summer when MDT completes the Rouse reconstruction project. Discussion and Decision Items Voting Board Member The board agreed to support CC appointment of Marley McKenna as a voting member to replace Kate Wiggins. She will complete the online application which will trigger CC consideration. Residential Incentive Program Chris provided board with updates to the Residential Incentive Program from comments made from the October board meeting. The following language was added/changed: Under the Purpose section: “Applicants are reminded that grant criteria and awards are discretionary in nature, subject to revisions…” Affordable Housing definition: “Further, affordable housing does not require greater than 33 percent of the household gross annual income for housing”. This was added to match the City of Bozeman Affordable Housing Plan. One Bedroom Unit definition “…not to exceed 650 SF”. Tony Renslow and Marley McKenna commented that the maximum SF requirement on one bedroom units should not exceed 800 SF and studios not to exceed 600 SF. The board agreed they want to encourage people to apply and not discourage anyone by having a strict SF requirement. Review Process: “Applications will be reviewed by the Downtown Bozeman Partnership staff and approved or denied by the Downtown Urban Renewal Board”. ACTION: Cory Lawrence moved to approve the updated Residential Incentive Program with discussed changes. Tony Renslow seconded the motion. All voted in favor. Downtown Truck Traffic Study Chris presented the need for an updated Main Street Truck Route Study since the last study was done in 2014. This study would be completed by Western Transportation Institute and mirror the prior study and provide a comparison report from 2014 to 2019. The 2019 Downtown Bozeman Plan highlights many areas of concern surrounding Main Street, and this study would be crucial taking the next steps on the Main Street projects. Chris said the cost would be under $20,000 and, if approved, posted to the “DBIP General Implementation” budget line item. ACTION: Nick Zelver moved to approve funds to conduct a new truck route study as proposed. Tony Renslow seconded the motion. All voted in favor. COB Community Plan Comments Chris presented notes (letter attached below) concerning the Bozeman Community Plan. These notes are to be submitted to the City Commission on behalf of the URD board. Chris indicated that this would likely be the first round of comments as the process will continue into 2020. ACTION: Tony Renslow moved to approve the letter of comments regarding the Bozeman Community Plan to be submitted by Chris Naumann on behalf of the URD Board. Nick Zelver seconded the motion. All voted in favor. The board agreed to cancel the December board meeting. Meeting was adjourned at 1:20 pm Date: December 2, 2019 To: Bozeman Planning Board & Community Development Department From: Chris Naumann, Downtown Urban Renewal District Board RE: Bozeman Community Plan, Planning Board Draft, Public Comment On behalf of the Downtown Urban Renewal District Board, I would like to offer the following comments regarding the current draft of the Bozeman Community Plan. We believe the revisions suggested below are important to assure solid alignment between the Community Plan and the adopted Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan. General Comments: 1. The 2009 Plan includes a glossary. This would be helpful for this document especially for terms that are not defined in the Unified Development Code. 2. Consider consistent nomenclature/phrasing. For example, there are references to “community planning regulations.” This language should be replaced with “Unified Development Code” for clarity. Additionally, several actions recommend establishing “minimum development intensity requirements” or incorporating “development minimums in designated growth areas.” Consistent language and adding examples (such as minimum floor area ratios, minimum number of stories, etc.) would be very helpful. 3. Several pages use the term “small town feel.” Other places in the document use the term “sense of place” which seems more appropriate given that Bozeman is already a city of 50,000 people. 4. The Engineering Department has indicated that they are updating their Design Standards to allow for more compact development. This has the potential to implement so many of the goals and should be a direct supporting action in the plan. Specific Comments: 5. One of the “Principles Applied in the Plan” (Page 15) states: “Infill development and redevelopment should be encouraged, but incremental compact outward growth is a necessary part of the continuing growth of the City.” This statement appears to give both types of development equal weight whereas other parts of the plan clearly prioritize a more inward focus. Consider using a stronger word than “encouraged” such as “emphasized” or “prioritized.” 6. Chapter 2, Theme 1 (Page 16) – The wording “Shape of our City” seems out of place with the other themes which all begin “A City…” The supporting text states: “The character of our well-planned City is defined by urban edges, a varied skyline, centers of employment and activity, pedestrian-friendly streetscapes, and easy access to the natural world.” Past iterations of this Theme included more specificity as to what is meant by “a varied skyline”. For instance, one draft specified “three to seven floors”. Without more detail, the phrase “a varied skyline” is too vague to provide any meaningful guidance. 7. Goal SC-2 (d) (Page 18) is certainly valid but would be better located under SC-3 as this is more directly related to the Unified Development Code. Also, the Goal should be reworded to more clearly indicate that the recommendation is to increase allowable heights to account for current construction methods. An example using number of stories would be helpful here. 8. Goal SC-2 (Page 18) Paired with the above recommendation, a new objective/action related to height should be added to SC-2 such as: “Evaluate increasing the number of stories allowed in centers of employment and activity and in industrial zones.” Such added language would more clearly support the objective to prioritize and incentivize denser infill development. 9. Theme 3 “Importance” (Page 23) states: “Density of development must be balanced with other community priorities such as the housing choices of citizens.” This wording suggests the only other community priority is “the housing choice of citizens”. Either explicitly identify all of the other priorities or to strike the second part of the sentence staring with “such as”. 10. Goal DCD-1 (f) (Page 24) states: “Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking to meet the need for vehicle parking as part of the overall transportation system for and between districts.” Consider removing the redundant language “to meet the need for vehicle parking.” 11. Overall, Goal DCD-2 (Page 24) “Support urban development within the City” includes many great suggestions; however, it is missing any actions related to parking which is one of the most influential factors currently limiting urban development. Please consider adding the following language: “Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking to support urban infill development.” The 2019 Downtown Improvement Plan includes many ideas such as unlocking existing spaces by simplifying parking requirements, encouraging shared parking, designing roads to maximize on-street parking and supporting structured parking. 12. Goal DCD-2 (b) (Page 24) states: “Work with state regulatory agencies and the legislature to remove disincentives in state law and regulations to municipal development.” Please add detail as to what general areas or topics this statement is referring to. 13. Goal DCD-2 (f) (Page 24) includes the following language: “Document existing policies and practices and develop additional policies if needed to appropriately address issues for infill development.” Again, are there specific policies and practices being referenced by this statement? Address which issues related to infill? Consider adding specific examples and rewording to be more encouraging of infill: “Document existing policies and practices and develop additional policies to support infill development.” 14. Chapter 3, Future Land Use (Page 39): consider the following alternative language for the description of the Community Core Land Use Designation: Community Core. The traditional core of Bozeman is Downtown. This area exemplifies high quality urban design including an active streetscape supported by a mix of uses on multiple floors, a high level of walkability, and a rich architectural and local character. Additionally, essential government services and flexible spaces for events and festivals support opportunities for civic and social engagement. The intensity of development in this district is high with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) well over 1. As Bozeman grows, continued evolution is necessary for long-term resilience. Challenges do exist, particularly around keeping local identity intact, balancing growth sensitively, and welcoming more transportation modes and residents. Underdevelopment and a lack of flexibility can threaten the viability of the land use designation. Future development should be intense while providing areas of transition to adjacent neighborhoods and preserving the character of the Main Street Historic District through context-sensitive development.