Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.05.19 P&Z Minutes_exppdf 1 City Staff and Others: Scott Johnson – Economic Development Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer Tawnya Grover – P&Z Administrative Assistant Chairman Rory Kunz opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Present: Chairman Rory Kunz, Bruce Sutherland, Melanie Davenport, Steve Oakey, Vince Haley, Keith Esplin, David Pulsipher, Todd Marx. Absent: Greg Blacker, John Bowen, Kristi Anderson. Minutes: From Planning and Zoning meeting – November 7, 2019 MOTION. Motion: Motion to approve the minutes for November 7, 2019, Action: Approve, Moved by Keith Esplin, Seconded by David Pulsipher. VOTE. Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 0, Abstain = 1). Yes: Bruce Sutherland, Chairman Rory Kunz, David Pulsipher, Keith Esplin, Steve Oakey, Todd Marx, Vince Haley. Abstain: Melanie Davenport. Public Hearings: 1. 6:35PM –Downtown Rexburg District Strategic Vision and Development Blueprint 2050 (19-00726) – Guiding goals and objectives for downtown development. (action) – Scott Johnson 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Planning & Zoning Minutes December 5, 2019 2 Steve Oakey asked about the results of the community meetings. The results of the community meetings will be part of today’s discussion. Staff Report: Economic Developer Scott Johnson –This project has been in progress for a year and a half. The things we talk about should not be new. There have been some public meetings with the Commissioners, City Council and with downtown business leaders. Some of the Commissioners attended; we appreciate that. There was a lot of good feedback. The most important thing to understand is we are setting up the framework to be adopted into our next Comprehensive Plan, specifically for the downtown area. In the 3rd paragraph, this does not seek to limit or bind any future planning efforts. It also does not seek to regulate any future actions; it is only a vision document. The visions will describe what the City ant icipates to see in the downtown area. Chairman Rory Kunz asked Scott Johnson to remind the Commissioners of the location of the downtown boundaries: 2nd W to 2nd E and 2nd S to 1st N about a 12-block area and it does include certain frontages of certain b locks. On the GIS map, the downtown area can be seen. This is a culmination of a lot of planning efforts. In 2004, a big effort was made to look at the downtown. Every planning after this has included a large component of downtown. Commissioner Bruce Sutherland clarified; the downtown focus began before 2004, in 2001. Even the Parks and Trails plans talk about the downtown: how do they get to the downtown and how do they get away from it? Downtown Revitalization Plan in 2004, the Comprehensive Plan and the Teton View Regional Plan call out Rexburg’s downtown, also Envision Madison.  Why do you like Rexburg? Weather, etc.  Why do businesses want to be in the city center? People only think of Main Street when we say “downtown”, this is why the term “city center” is being used. Answers included amenities, access to talent, government, proximity to BYU-Idaho, people coming in to our community.  Why is the city center important? (List on a slide.) Commissioner Keith Esplin sees the answer, center for jobs. He does not feel the city center has more jobs than other places in the city. A trend Scott is seeing in Economic Development, according to Census data and Department of Labor data, there are just under 3,460 jobs in the city center and 8,000 people visit during the day. More companies are looking to locate in the city center.  What do property owners want? Public answers include fewer restrictions, lower barriers, more parking, more traffic, more businesses and retailers, more tenants. Parking is an interesting theme throughout the process; people list parking as both a strength and a weakness in the downtown.  What are the City Center’s strengths? Stakeholders and residents mention a cultural venue, tabernacle, Romance Theatre; room for growth; Walkability, they appreciate efforts to increase the walkability. On Main Street, we average 23,000 cars/day. There is a lot of pedestrian movement that is not measured. Proximity to BYU-Idaho and parking. 3  What is the City Center lacking? Parking, it is not right in front of the store. No focal point, more talent based in the City Center, visitors and shoppers to stay in the Center; right now they are coming to one destination and leaving. A draw to bring visitors from the highway to the City Center. Affordable entertainment to appeal to many different demographics. Keith Esplin says in some bigger cities, they are putting in high -density housing in the downtown, which keeps people there and the center is vibrant at night. Is this a priority? Scott answered, yes, this is a focus. Commissioner Melanie Davenport found it interesting no one mentioned food establishments and restaurants or the lack thereof in the City Center. Someone did, but Dan showed a map of the businesses in the downtown and people were in shock by how many restaurants in the Center. People realized there were more than they thought, but there are some more opportunities. Commissioner Steve Oakey reminded the Commissioners to keep in mind the Trax system in Salt Lake, which is a heavily subsidized, under-utilized transportation system available for Salt Lake City residents. The heavily densified housing areas in downtown correspond with the Trax system, because they have a policy (found in Utah Stories); those units will target middle to high income, single people; families do not want to live downtown. The government is subsidizing this housing for people who would generally be able to afford housing anyway. The government is providing transportation ; why would a private entity provide it? When the demand comes, the market will fill the demand. Fortunately, we only have the Wal-Mart bus and Ivy transportation. Scott Johnson continued with the sections in the document: he read the vision statement: The Rexburg City Center will be a community and regional hub for economic growth and prosperity strengthening commercial, entertainment, cultural and public assets and creating a prosperous city. Please tell us if you feel something needs to be added in or taken out. This effort was started with Craig Rindlisbacher and Scott’s department is filling in the gaps until Alan Parkinson is up and running. They have taken a 12-paragraph section and shortened it to the vision statement. Strategies: 1. A City Center should be an attractive and walkable place. People should want to be in the City Center. The more eyes on the street, the safer and more desirable a street is. The City can focus on infrastructure with lighting, seating and how the building s interact within the space. The intent is to make it a destination and encourage visitors to go to multiple places in the downtown, because the environment is inviting. 2. Diversity of economic uses. The housing is a part of it. Successful downtowns have a combination of uses. He went to Indianapolis. The downtown was well designed and people were there until about 5:30pm and then the downtown became a ghost town. No one was living in the downtown. Some events bring people to the downtown, like an NBA game and some restaurants had some activity, but many of them suffered. How can we be inclusive of uses in the downtown ? 4 3. Encourage business. Focus on making it feasible for businesses to be in the downtown. This makes a business more viable. One of the things that hurt cities is too much sprawl and spread out infrastructure. 4. Promote an attainable City Center. Normally what you hear is affordable. The word affordable is not what we believe should be used. No matter who you are, we want anyone to be able to live there. Size, cost, etc. Some of this will be driven by the market, but how can this be encouraged? What can be done to encourage all levels of developers? 5. Improving government regulations and processes ; lessening, simplify. An example is a developer comes in and the Public Works Director requires them to do a few studies like traffic, sewer & water, etc. In areas like this, should the city pay for the studies in advance so the developers do not have to? Scott Oakey asked if there is a lawful requirement for those studies to take place? Scott answered this a legal question. Steve continued with an example, someone is going to build a 200-room complex, with 2 bathrooms and a kitchen. It seems to him there should be a common formula that is used. Based on the information and the number of gallons running through the building, a rough calculation should be able to be determined. Why is there a need for a study? I would be asking the developer, are you going to provide parking for your customers? How many cars do you anticipate? The answer would determine the likely number of cars that would be on the road. This is why Steve is asking if there is a State or Federal requirement. Scott did not have an answer and the attending attorney, Rob, would have to check on the answer to this question. Ultimately, Public Works does not have the time and staff to do the studies. Steve stated he bets Johnny Watson could do the same calculations, because he has the software to do them. Scott answered we do know the engineering firms that do the studies and share the information with the City. In the downtown, the City believes the City should participate in those studies. We have talked about uses in past discussions and how can we simplify our zoning? Scott and Alan were talking about some things that they are looking at changing with a developer. The developer suggested if those changes were made, he might be able to do something in the downtown; this make the downtown a viable option. These types of things are what the City is looking at to incentivize people. Commissioner Vince Haley said this is a vision, is the vision going to be changing regulations? The regulations will come next to the Planning & Zoning Commission to support this vision. We are probably looking at January for that presentation. Scott continued, some of these regulation ideas, the Commission has already been introduced; the types of ideas the City is considering including form-based regulations. 6. Identify Key Projects. When we look at the City of Rexburg and the land off the tax rolls, we look at things we can do to get some of that land out of our hands and into the hands of developers to get that land back on the tax rolls. A mixed-use parking structure is an option allowing the City to sell off some flat-surface parking to developers. There is a possibility of partnering with the County to do a joint City/County administration building. Steve Oakey mentioned the school district. The school district owns a key piece of the downto wn and could shrink their footprint too. 5 7. Establish On-Going Place Management. The City and others could share the upkeep of the downtown. The hope is that the City could help create a downtown association that would participate in keeping the downtown a nice place to be. Beautification. In the document, the strategies are broken down further to objectives and action items. Steve Oakey talked about a barrier to entry of impact fees and the option of potentially spreading that cost out over time. He was talking to a builder and he mentioned these impact fees. We become accustomed to doing things a certain way, but from time to time, I hear the impact fees are discouraging. Perhaps, we could put some ideas towards this issue. Scott is trying to encourage businesses and he has to understand why we have impact fees. There is a difference between impact fees verses connection and capacity fees. There are 4 impact fees: police, fire, parks and streets. Connection and capacity fees are for sewer and water; these are standard anywhere you go. If you are commercial, you do not pay the parks portion; only residential does. Generally, the state limits the ability of the cities to raise the overall levy rate a certain percentage. It became important for the City to do impact fees. Impact fees can be placed on the backs of everyone through taxes or you place that cost on the backs of the developers to pay for that impact. Keith Esplin asked isn’t the impact less in the downtown, because sewer and water lines are in place in the downtown? It seems a business going in downtown should pay less impact fees than those going in on the periphery of town. Stephen Zollinger, City Attorney, is looking into this: once adopted by State statute, does the city have the ability to change them in certain areas? Scott suggested perhaps the adjacent infrastructure does not need to be upgraded but the plants themselves do to handle the volume. The City is exploring a variety of possibilities. Melanie Davenport asked about water and sewer capacities as it refers to the developers who do multi-use with housing; the problem is still consistency in occupancy. The City has been working with a developer, who is looking at going in to the downtown and asked them to come back with some numbers; they came back with the numbers and the numbers may be skewed. The City is going to partner with the developer to do a complete market analysis. This will help the City understand what is going on. Community housing keeps filling, but only in certain segments but including, restaurants and services. Melanie feels like this is a good time to take this initiative. Steve Oakey is working with Graffiti Salon and the issues of impact fees came up to get their licensing in order. Apparently, there is a formula for hair salons. If there is a large fee due up front, why can’t this be stretched over a series of months or years. In many of the downtown buildings, there are many small entrepreneurs under budget constraints. Downtowns typ ically have some character to them due to the nature of entrepreneurs coming and going. Dan was just saying the property owner is impacted, not necessarily the business owner. Impact fees are going through a study right now. You can always contact Matt Neilson and Keith Davidson for more information. Vince Haley asked if there is an effort to keep historical buildings? Scott has not heard much of this, due to the flood taking many of them. The government has purchased several remaining historical buildings like the Tabernacle and the Romance Theatre. Right now, it would be up to the property owner. If we had an intact historical district, we might look at this; our historical buildings remaining are really spread out. Steve Oakey thinks it is interesting that the private owners have taken this upon themselves. Brad and Sheri Smith refurbished and took the 50s & 60s façade off and exposed the original building. John Webber, Bingham and Sons did the same thing. Other businesses are following the same pattern. They see the value in the building 6 underneath. The City has an incentive, a revolving loan fund, to take the facades back to the original. The City does not feel they should be forcing this; it is not in the downtown vision. Melanie Davenport thinks the shift from affordability to attainability is a mind -shift and is multi-faceted. The thought is how do you make the City Center accessible to a multitude of people? Vince believes the City is taking a step back and allowing the downtown association. The people cannot be forced to change unless they choose to change even with the association. Is the City going to approach them? Beauty is in the eye of beholder. He is not going to approach all of them. Scott talks to them about relocating and changing the look, but not forcing. Scott will not approach everyone, but he talks to some that may have things falling off their facades. Natalie Powell talks to them a little bit more, at least to put their façade back together. Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they had any conflicts of interest or had been approached by any parties relative to this particular subject. If you believe your prior contact with respect to this subject has created a bias, you should recuse yourself, other wise at this time please indicate the nature of your conversation or contact. Chairman Rory Kunz reviewed the public hearing procedures. Chairman Rory Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing at 7:30 p.m. Favor: None Neutral: None Opposed: None Written Input: None Rebuttal: None Chairman Rory Kunz asked if anyone else would like to speak? He closed the public input portion of the hearing at 7:30 p.m. Vince Haley asked the Chairman if this was a decision that needed to be made tonight? He knows the Commissioners have been given drafts in the past. Chairman Rory Kunz said he knows the process is trying to move forward. Bruce Sutherland stated this is not a binding document right now but a series of meetings that consider advantages of this document. MOTION: Motion to recommend approval by City Council of the Downtown Vision document to be placed in the Comprehensive Plan due to the fact this is a Blueprint document , which does not change our zoning, and due to the fact this is the culmination of a series of meetings to stress the importance of the City Center, Action: Approve, Moved by Bruce Sutherland, Seconded by Keith Esplin. Commission Discusses the Motion: Scott stressed this document creates a path forward with regulation to follow. Chairman Rory Kunz asked what Vince Haley’s opinions or hold-ups are on this document? Vince lots to ask all kinds of questions, but with the newer draft and with limited time to look through the document prior to this meeting, he wants some assurity of the City’s motivations and the implications of passing the document. Vince Haley is comforted by the fact this is not a regulatory document at this time. Steve Oakey would vote in favor of it as well, but when government writes something like this, it tends to fossilize and appears to be rules and 7 regulations. He does not like the City conducting the market research; he believes private businesses should be conducting market research. However, he wo uld vote for this request to move it along and not get hung up in the details in this case. Rob, acting as City Attorney, looked into if the studies are required. The City has the ability to request the studies, but it is not required. Steve Oakey suggested simplifying this part of the process and eliminating this cost from a developer, assuming they have an engineering or architectural firm coming in. Scott clarified the City ends up participating in all of the studies anyway. The Market Feasibility study participate in a larger study allows for an opportunity to have a larger scope. Steve says what has happened is the government has extracted a job out of the private market. The City is just looking at getting the data to help any businesses that w ant to come in to the City. The Census information is not correct due to the number of students. Participating in an overall study would be beneficial, giving everyone better information to use. There was some discrepancy over the numbers suggested ear lier for jobs and people in the downtown. This study will focus on accurate demographics. VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8). Yes: Bruce Sutherland, Chairman Rory Kunz, David Pulsipher, Keith Esplin, Melanie Davenport, Steve Oakey, Todd Marx, Vince Haley. David Pulsipher asked if changes would be made between the Planning & Zoning Commission to the City Council. This draft will go to City Council. Heads Up: December 12th – Possible continuation of Downtown Vision ; canceled (business completed) January 2nd, 2020 – Hearing: 1. (19-00710) - 236 N 3rd E – Rezone to MDR1 2. (19-00719) – 431 S 2nd W – CUP for reduced front yard setbacks in PED, reduced parking the PED and dormitory housing Adjournment: Commissioner Rory Kunz adjourned the meeting at 7:40 PM.