Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-09-2009 ~ CITY OF~`* DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE V WASHINGT'ON SEPTEBER 9, 2009 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Lynn Norman called the meeting to order at 4:06 p.m. in the Council Chambers located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA. Committee Members present were: Chair Lynn Norman, Vice Chair Sue Singer and Member Gene Cerino. Staff present included: Planning, Building & Community Director Cindy Baker, Public Works Director Dennis Dowdy, Principal Planner Elizabeth Chamberlain, City Engineer Dennis Selle, Assistant City Engineer Ingrid Gaub, Project Engineer Jacob Sweeting, Economic Development Manager Dave Baron, Parks, Arts & Recreation Director Daryl Faber, and Planning Secretary Renee Tobias. Audience Members present were: Spencer Alpert, Doug Oberst, Gail Spurrell, Kathleen Keator, Jack Saelid, Ken Nelson, Susan Nelson, Mel Maertz, and Ronnie Roberts. II. CONSENT AGENDA A. Meeting Minutes - August 25, 2009 Approval of minutes was deferred to the September 22, 2009 meeting. III. DISCUSSION A. Status of Downtown Auburn Redevelopment Introductions were made to the Committee by Spencer Alpert, Spencer International, Mel Maertz, Principal, M2 Architects, and Doug Oberst, BCRA Architect Engineering. 1) Continued discussion of the design features of Auburn Junction At the August 25, 2009 meeting, Committee reviewed several photos from the Pearl Street Mall in Boulder, Colorado. Staff presented a decision-making matrix to assist the Committee in making final policy direction and decisions regarding traffic circulation, bike lanes and other details. Once the Committee makes these decisions, staff will then work out the details of the layout and design of Auburn Junction with the developer. Director Cindy Baker stated that this is a continuation of the August 25, 2009 discussion. Decision-Makinq Matrix - Amenities usinq Boulder, CO photos Question E: OK with types of bicycle racks as seen in photos. Referencing the bike rack photos included in the August 25, 2009 packet, the Committee was asked if these were typical of racks they liked and if there were any in particular they did not like. ~ Page 1 \ ✓ Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes September 9, 2009 Committee agreed that there should be a variety of interesting bike racks. The racks should not take over the streetscapes and should match the building and surrounding areas; adding ambience to the street. Committee felt that the bike racks should not be large, possibly stacking. Further, the requirements for the bike racks should not be too prescriptive. Committee briefly discussed the City of Portland's Pearl District using one on-street parking spot for a 10-bike rack. Committee agreed that this may be an option for an intensive use area in the Urban Center at some point in the future, but on a sidewalk area as parking is a premium. Question F.- Hanging baskets. In previous meetings, the Committee had agreed that hanging baskets should be on street and pedestrian lights in the Downtown Urban Center. Public Works staff is currently working on the details of the height, dimension and other factors needed for the street and pedestrian lights. Director Baker asked for confirmation if the Committee wanted hanging baskets on store frontages in the downtown area. Committee agreed that hanging baskets on store fronts should be encouraged where it is pedestrian-safe and windows or signage are not blocked. Committee does not want to be prescriptive, but wants to encourage the use of natural flowers and plantings to draw shoppers into the businesses. Question G: Interactive Areas i Committee discussed the downtown city plaza in Vancouver, Washington where they used mounds of grass, natural stonework paths and water features. Committee discussed that larger areas in Auburn's downtown would be needed for interactive areas. Question H: Materials - pedestrian areas Director Baker briefly recounted the Committee's previous discussions on pedestrian area materials and suggested that staff work with the developer to create an ultimate design using mixed materials. Staff asked the Committee if they still agreed with the materials listed in the Downtown Urban Center Design Standards. Committee's preference was for the use of pedestrian-safe pavers, brick, stamped concrete, and brick/concrete; asphalt should not be used in the pedestrian areas. Committee further agreed that any pavers used should be tied into the current downtown area. Question 1: Use Boulder pictures as example in the Downtown Design Standards? Director Baker asked the Committee if there are additional pictures that should be added to the Downtown Design Standards, such as the Boulder pictures and from the new Muckleshoot School. Committee agreed that additional pictures offering alternatives should be added. Committee was not in support in rewriting the Downtown Design Standards. Page 2 Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes September 9, 2009 2) Discussion of the Mayor's Institute on City Design Results The City participated in a design charrette August 31 - September 2, 2009 with the Mayor's Institute on City Design (MICD) and three resource team members. After meetings with Mayor Lewis, staff, downtown stakeholders and developers, the resource team presented their recommendations for the revitalization of Downtown Auburn. Based upon these recommendations, staff asked the Committee the following questions and direction on how the recommendations may be incorporated into the Auburn Junction project. Question 1: Does the Committee want staff to move forward with amending the Auburn Junction Design Standards requiring only a two-three story building on the northern half of the Cavanaugh block if studied by the developer and found to be economically feasible to all parties and an economic draw? In response to Committee's question, staff reported that the current Design Standards do not have a specific height restriction. The recommendation by the MICD team was to keep the height of the buildings along Main Street the same height. The developer could construct a higher building in portions of a block that do not front Main Street (e.g. step the building back). The current Auburn Junction Design Standards state: Project shall provide aesthetic appeal, ambience and connectivity to Main Street, mixed facades to complement historic Main Street, the nearby Transit Station and parking facility. This is in the architectural features of the Design Standards and is not a requirement that the height be continued on Main Street. Committee agreed that the Auburn Junction Design Standards should be amended to require a pedestrian scale similar to historic Main Street for the buildings fronting Main Street. Staff will remove reference to Cavanaugh block. Question 2: Does the committee want to expand the City Hall Plaza into a larger civic plaza as recommended by the MICD Resource Team (professional architects) if studied by the developer and found to be economically feasible to all parties and an economic draw? Director Baker reminded the Committee that the MICD team recommended pooling open spaces into one location as an attractor to the downtown area. The MICD team suggested building the proposed City Hall Plaza kiosk on the Marvel Deli & Grocery corner, creating a larger pedestrian place to walk, sit, stay and play. Doug Oberst, BCRA Architect Engineering, stated that in projects such as this, gathering places that draw people into the area would be an economic benefit to a developer. Mr. Oberst noted that there are studies indicating that businesses located' around plazas tend to do better, with increased sales tax revenue, than those businesses that are not. Committee discussed various options, including sidewalks in the Promenade project, and agreed with the question to have an expanded city hall plaza into a larger civic plaza directly south of the existing location as recommended by the MICD resource team. Question 3: Does the Committee want staff to review the design standards done at a macro level? Page 3 Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes September 9, 2009 The Committee did not want to revisit the Auburn Junction design standards to include items from the recently approved Mixed Use/Multifamily design standards since they were just adopted September 2008. Question 4: Does the Committee like the concept of removing parking on the north side of Main Street to crate a wider sidewalk with the availability for outdoor seating and pedestrian environment? Parking would be relocated to another location in downtown so no net loss of spaces. Committee agreed that before making a decision on this question, input from downtown merchants, through the Auburn Downtown Association is needed. Staff will work with the Association to gather their input and ideas for Main Street, including the advantages/disadvantages of widening sidewalks on one side for outdoor seating and having angled parking on one side with no parking on the other side of the street. One Main Street (Auburn Professional Plaza) The MICD team discussed leaving the Main Street sidewalk treatments as they are to maintain consistency between the new and old. As it relates to the One Main (Auburn Professional Plaza) frontage improvements on Main Street only, staff asked the Committee the following question. Question 1: Does the Committee want to keep the boardwalk sidewalk on Main Street Only? If no, how does the Committee want to implement the change - project-by-project or as a corridor improvement? Assistant City Engineer Ingrid Gaub stated that a recommendation by the MICD team was to work with what is already in place regarding sidewalks. The Downtown Sidewalk Guidelines are would change this look to the scored concrete and bricks at the bulb corners. Staff indicated that the sidewalks for One Main Street building will be poured shortly and now would be the time to make any changes, if the Committee chose to do so. Committee agreed that the boardwalk sidewalks should not be continued within the downtown area. Ms. Gaub asked if the Committee's expectation was to make the changes as each development occurred or by doing a corridor project, changing the sidewalks at the same time, particularly along East Main Street. Committee stated their preference is to remove all boardwalk sidewalks in a corridor improvement if a grant funding was available. Otherwise, remove the boardwalk sidewalk project-by-project. 3) Bike racks - Urban Vitality Grant Director Baker notified the Committee that the City has submitted an Urban Vitality Grant application. If it is awarded, the City will finalize the White River Trail, striping C Street and putting a number of bicycle amenities throughout the Urban Center. Page 4 Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes September 9, 2009 4) Street Lighting Question 1: Does the Committee want to keep the Main Street lights as they are? If no, how does the Committee want to implement the change - project-by-project or as a corridor improvement? Assistant City Engineer Ingrid Gaub confirmed for the Committee that the current lights can be repaired, but parts must be fabricated. This is more expensive than purchasing parts "off the shelf'. Ms. Gaub stated that lights could be replaced on the south side of Main Street in the Auburn Junction area. The City would be responsible for funding the replacement of lights on Main Street between Auburn Way and Auburn Avenue. Staff offered another option which would be to systematically replace two or three lights each year. Cost for new lights, based on previous Committee comments, would be $5,000 per light. This would include double armed lights to replace an existing light on the current base. To replace the base, the cost would be $6,000 per light, plus added expenses to tear up of the sidewalk. Ms. Gaub distributed a drawing and information of a proposed downtown light standard. Ms. Gaub noted that it may be less expensive to replace parts in the long run, but it depends on the Committee's vision for the downtown. Committee asked for the costs to fabricate pieces needed to repair the lights. Staff are working on this and will bring the information back to the September 22, 2009 Committee meeting. Ms. Gaub cbnfirmed that there are 62 lights on Main Street and 67 pedestrian lights on the other downtown streets. Staff will confirm the number of lights on Main Street between Auburn Way to Auburn Avenue. Increasing the spacing of lights along Main Street would result in additional costs for sidewalk construction and wiring. Using the current spacing of 40 feet would not result in additional wiring costs. Regarding replacement of lights between A Street and Auburn Avenue, costs are included in the plans for the City Hall Plaza. The standards in place when the One Main Street project was approved did not require that the developer replace the lights. Ms. Gaub noted that the lights removed from the One Main Street project are being used to repair other lights. Staff clarified with the Committee that staff received lighting suggestions from the Alpert design team, which included their lighting expert, and then staff worked with the City's lighting manufacture. Staff further clarified that the light base would be less ornate than current lights and the color would be black. Committee directed staff to move forward with the proposed light standard and staff will amend the Downtown Urban Center Design Guidelines. Staff will further work on the Main Street corridor improvement project and bring back to Committee for action. IV. INFORMATION 1) Committee asked staff to bring back information on how bike lanes would work with bulb-out sidewalks on street corners and if the City Hall Plaza is built out into the street. Assistant City Engineer Gaub briefly stated that adding bike lanes through downtown streets that have a 60 foot right-of-way and 10 foot sidewalk requirements per the Page 5 Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes September 9, 2009 Downtown Sidewalk Guidelines parking would have to be removed from one side of the street. The bulb-out would only be on one side of the street that has parking. Committee will have further bike lane discussion after receiving comments from the Auburn Downtown Association. 2) Staff distributed a handout, Auburn Junction - Alpert Vision from 30,000 feet (big ideas now,'details later) that was provided to staff by the Alpert development team after the MICD Conference. Staff will work with the Alpert development team to review the information, confirming that the elements meet the Auburn Junction Design Guidelines. The Alpert team was asked, and agreed, to identify the modifications made on the drawing that are outside of the approved Promenade design. Any items that do not meet the design guidelines may come back to the Committee for discussion and/or action. The Committee agreed to review the handouts and forward comments to staff or add this to the next meeting agenda for discussion. 3) Staff responded to Vice Chair Singer's questions about the two current downtown projects, One Main Street and the hospital/city parking structure. V. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Downtown Redevelopment Committee, Chair Norman adjourned the meeting at 5:45 p.m. PROVED THIS Zt--- DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2009. Lynn o an, Chair nee S. Tobias, Planning Secretary Page 6 The following are questions that need policy direction and decision. Questions for the Committee Yes No Comments Traffic, Vehicular, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Circulation: What feel and look do you want? a. Any desire for streets in Auburn Junction as X pedestrian only? If so, • 1 st Street (entire 2 blocks; 60 ft wide) X Committee agreed that no • 1 st Street (one block (60 ft wide) X streets would be closed in the • Promenade (entire 2 blocks; 60 ft wide) X Auburn Junction area. • Promenade (one or portion of block; 60 feet X wide • Related Issue: • Designate 1st Street SW/SE o Do you want outside restaurants located "Flat" with different pavement on street-side with cars? X amenities, no curb for future pedestrian or intermittent activities. o Do you want large amenities (see below), Committee concurred positively, if so, won't fit on typical street sidewalk). but that the larger amenities would require additional space to X be provided by the private development in addition to the existing ROW as discussed reviousl . b. Do you want to slow traffic on Auburn Avenue/A Committee concurred with Street SE, if so, what options would you prefer? installing a pedestrian/traffic • One-way street from Auburn Way N to Cross X signal at 1St Street SE and A Street? Street SE. Committee further • Partiall one-wa street? X agreed that A Street SE would • Vegetated center median (in the downtown be one lane each way from Main lan Street to 3rd Street SE/Cross • Traffic signal that accommodates possible Street. This would allow the arkin ara e at "Safewa X development of more amenities • Other traffic calming? X and bicycle safe lanes to draw eo le into the area. c. Do you want other traffic slowing or pedestrian X Committee agreed with installing crossin s? a pedestrian signal at the bus • Traffic signal along A Street SW by Transit X entrance on A Street SW at 1 St Center after A/B corridor is finished? Street SW. Staff were asked to • Traffic signal at the analyze the traffic signal operation on 2"d Street between ' A Street SW/SE to make it more ' edestrian-friendl . d. What accommodations do you want for bicycle routes? X • Ac uire more ri ht-of-wa and widen streets? Committee agreed that the second option, installing a bike • Remove on-street arkin ? couplet, should be considered. • Bike couplets to minimize removal of on-street X arkin ? • Shared bike and travel X Page 7 Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes September 9, 2009 e. Other ldeas • Turn right on Main Street going north and Committee disagreed with this partially or fully close Auburn Avenue going ' X question north of Main Street Amenities (use Boulder Pictures) a. Ran e of different sittin areas • Benches X Committee asked for variety of • Large round planter with seats surrounding - X amenities and did not want to size 6 ft in diameter have each block match in • Large, square-ish elevated planters; 5'x5' or X amenities. u to 20' x 20' • Curb like area around amenities X b. Art Work Committee agreed that the City's • Brass figures Cultural Arts staff would work • Rock walk-through with Planning staff to be • Decorative columns X responsible for these decisions. Committee further agreed that there should be "art surprises" throu hout the develo ment. c. Buildings Committee concurred with • Varying small, store fro ntag es/streetsca pe X questions, i.e., store frontages, • First story continued to second story streetscapes and canopy types • Va in cano t es should be varied. d. Kiosks Committee agreed that they like • Size - where to place if larger the various styles of kiosks and X those they should be installed at major entrances, City Hall and Transit Center. e. OK with types of bicycle racks as seen in photos Committee agreed that there should be a variety of interesting bike racks. The racks should not take over the streetscapes and should match the building and X surrounding areas, adding ambience to the street. Committee felt that the bike racks should not be large, possibly stacking. Further, the requirements for the bike racks should not be too rescri tive. f. Hanging baskets Committee previously agreed • Poles on top of pedestal that hanging baskets should be • Street lights on street and pedestrian lights in • Additional poles X the DUC. Committee agreed that • Store frontages hanging baskets on store fronts should be encouraged where it is pedestrian-safe and windows or si na e are not blocked. Page 8 Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes September 9, 2009 g. Interactive areas Committee discussed that larger ~ Sand/gravel with climbing features areas in Auburn's downtown • Water feature would be needed for interactive • Brid es areas. h. Materials - pedestrian areas Committee's preference was for • Brick the use of pedestrian-safe • Concrete - stamped pavers, brick, stamped concrete, • Concrete - not stamped and brick/concrete; asphalt • Brick and concrete X should not be used in the • Asphalt pedestrian areas. Committee • Other further agreed that any pavers used should be tied into the current downtown area i. Use Boulder pictures as example in the - Committee agreed that Downtown Design Standards? additional pictures offering alternatives should be added. Committee was not in support in rewriting the Downtown Design Standards. Auburn Junction a. Is the Council satisfied with the general layout X • Committee is satisfied. and function of the ro osed Auburn Junction? • Council's preference is more b. Does it meet the intent of our vision? X residential without losing c. Does it meet the goals of the Comprehensive retail base. Plan, Downtown Plan, and Auburn Junction X • Chair Norman would like to Desi n Standards? see an entertainment entity d. Does the mix of uses` fit with your intent? included in the plan. Commercial, Office, Residential X Page 9