Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-26-2010 ~K CIlY OF_ * DOWNTOWIV REDEVELOPN6ENT k COIVIIVIITTEE WASHINGTON JANUARY 26, 2010 MINUTES L CALL TO ORDER - 4:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS , Chair Lynn Norman called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Sfreef, Aubum, WA. Committee Members present were: Chair Lynn Norman and Vice Chair Sue Singer, Member Nancy Backus was excused. Staff present included: Interim Director Kevin Snyder, Principal Planner Elizabeth Chamberlain, City Engineer Dennis Selle, Assistant City Engineer Ingrid Gaub, and Planning Secretary Ren6e Tobias. Audience Members present were; Spencer Alpert, Mel Maertz, Kathleen Keator, Gail SpuRell, Val Erickson, and Jack Saelid. II. CONSENT AGENDA A: Meeting Minutes - December 8, 2009 Vice Chair Singer moved to accept the minutes with the following corrections. Chair Norman concurred. , Page 2, sentence to read: Ms. Gaub noted that diverting the traffic to Auburn , Way and C Street from the A Street corridor would not have significant reduction in traffic flow. Page 3, sentence to read: Mel Maertz reported that at Friday's meeting, the group discussed allowing some flexibility on securing retail space if the central plaza is developed in the northeast block of Aubum Junction. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 2-0 III. DISCUSSION/INFORMATION A. Downtown Urban Center Design Standards The Downtown Urban Center Design Standards were originally adopted as part of the Downtown Urban Center (DUC) zone by the City Council February 2007. Subsequent amendments have been made to the standards to.address the two projects nearing completion, the One Main Building and Medical Office ~ Building/Parking Garage. Now that these two projects liave been constcucted under the current Downtown Urban Center Design Standards, the Committee and staff discussed what elements of the existing standards worked with the two projects and whaf elements did not work and should be revised. Staff presented aerial photographs of the One Main Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes Januarv 26. 2010 Building and architect drawings of the Medical Office Building for the Committee's review. All Development Guidelines - Building Design Item 3- Screeninq of Trash/Services Areas Intent: Screen trash storage, loading and service areas from public view. The Committee questioned the visible trash storage area and the bla.nk walls on the east side of One Main Street building. Trash enclosures require screening by a masonry wall and landscaping. Staff responded that the blank walls have been addressed with the developer. They will post a financial guarantee to finish the walls to meet the City's standards. The - developer will re-grade the current Key Bank parking lot in order to slope the water away from the building; the walls will be finished after this. Staff confirmed that existing surface parking lots in the downtown area may remain. Should the current Key Bank building be demolished, said property cannot be tumed into a parking lot as the code does not permit surface parking lots adjacent to pedestrian streets. Item 8- Rooftop Equipment Reauirements and Screening Intent: Screen rooftop mechanical and communications equipment from the ground level of nearby streets and residential areas. The Committee reviewed the aerial photographs of the One Main Building and noted ~ that the rooftop equipment is screened with what appears to be a fence. This is not an acceptable method of screening per the DUC Zone Design Standards. Staff stated that their interpretation was that it is not really a fence and staff saw this as an extension of the building. Staff worked with the developer to creafe somefhing that would work with the design ofthe building and find ways to balance it with the design standards. Staff agreed that this was obviously something that probably hasn't worked. Staff will define "fence" and re-work the wording in this section. Adjacent to Pedesfrian Streets - Building Design Item 3- Ground Level Transqarencv Intent: Provide a visual connection between activities inside and outside of buildings. The Committee commented that the windows of.a business facing Division Street, which is a Pedestrian I Street, are blocked by furniture on the north side of the One Main Building. Because of this, the windows sweat and again, does not meet the - intent of this section. Page 2 of 6 Downtown Redeveloqment Committee Minutes Januarv 26, 2010 Principal Planner Elizabeth Chamberlain responded that staff would have a talk with the business fo resolve the issue. Further, Ms. Chamberlain stated that that Plans Examiners review the plans for building code requirements. Ms. Chamberlain added that planning staff will ensure that they are not missing floor plan reviews on future tenant improvement permits. Item 4C - Ground Sians (Intemallv Lit Siqns) Per the DUC Zone Design Standards, intemally-lit signs are prohibited except when located adjacent and oriented to Aubum Way North/Aubum Way south street frontages. The Committee made recommendations at their October 13, 2009 meeting on how this section should be worded based on the then current downtown projects. Staff confirmed that no changes will be made to the electronic sign section of this item, and that cabinet and pole signs are prohibited. The next step is to make the changes to the Design Standards and then take to the Planning & Community DeVelopment Committee for approve. All Development Guidelines - Site Design Item 4 - Public Plazas Intent: ensure public plazas are readily accessible for use and offer a pleasant environment. Ms. Chamberlain stated that the hospital considered adding a plaza at the corner of. Division and 1 St Street (east side of the Medical Office Building), bufi later reconsidered due to the costs. The area now contains landscape, including plants and grass right up to the building. Ms. Chamberlain questioned whether the Design Standards were suffieient so thaf sfaff could require the project to create a plaza in , this area: Ms. Chamberlain asked the Committee for their intent on public plazas for downtown projects and if the language should be stronger that plazas are mandatory ~ or an option. Committee discussed and decided that a definition for plaza should be included in . the Design Standards. Further, the Committee did not have a problem with a green space in lieu of a plaza. Commitfee confirmed that a plaza is not a requirement; however, should developers opt to create a plaza, the Design Standards will need to be clear on the requirements. Pedestrian Street - Site Design Page 13 - Land Use Infent: Ensure a rich; uninterrupted mixture of lively activities aimed at people on foot. Along Pedestrian I Streets, ground floor uses that face the sidewalk shall be retail, restaurant or persorial service uses. Along Pedestrian II Streets, ground floor office and residential uses are also acceptable when facing the sidewalk. Page 3 of 6 . Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes Januarv 26. 2010 - Realizing that with the changing market, getting retail uses on all of the pedestrian streets may not be feasible. Staff stated they met with the Alpert team before this meeting and talked about what would be the change in market factors for the next couple of years. Staff asked if the Committee was open to discussing and identifying the crucial streets required to have retail use. Vice.Chair Singer stated her preference would tend to be stricter in the Promenade area for restaurants and the kinds of services that need the wider sidewalks as a means to draw the people to downfown. Committee expressed an inferest irt,leaming the statistics of what would be a reasonable expectation for mixed uses for older small downtowns. Staff will - research and bring the information back to; Committee. B. Other Discussion and Follow-Up ~ Sidewalks Staff confirmed for the Committee that the_ sidewalk, standards currently in place are for brick comers, with 2x2 scored concrete and 10 foot widths. The brick band requirement was removed from the standards. Staff noted that on the hospital project,, the street lights were placed in the middle of the sidewalk, which is what the standard indicates.' Ms: Chamberlain stated that staff would like to change the sidewalk standards to reflect that street lights should be closer to the curb. Staff will add the sidewalk sfandards for discussion`at a fufure meeting. Re4uired buildinq heicahfiand step backs Committee briefly discussed whether the standards should be changed to reflect the Mayors' Institute on City Design recommendation of a maximum of finro story and . required step backs for buildings on Main Sfreet. Staff will work with the Alpert Team to develop a white paper demonstrating what some of the change market factors would be and what will pencil out. Committee reiterated that they do not want . a canyon effect on Main Street. Canopies and AwninQs Staff.reported that the drainage systems on the canopies and awnings for the One Main Building are working.as designed. Incentivize Residential Development Ms. Chamberlain and Chair Norman recently attended Puget Sound Regional Council meeting where the City of Bellevue presented the status of their regional growth center. Chair Norman shared an example of Bellevue's "out of the box" trade off with one major company that brought them to locate in Bellevue. Ms. Chamberlain stated that residential in downtown Bellevue increased due to Bellevue's having an incentive for residential development and then the market took over. While the City of Aubum somewhat incentivizes residential development with additional floor area; Ms. Chamberlain asked if-the Committee would be willing fo look at other ways to build in more incentives or possible tradeoffs that might entice developers to the downtown core area. The Committee is open to having this discussion. " . Page 4 of 6 , , Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes Januarv 26, 2010 . Parkinq in Downtown Staff asked Committee if they would be amenable to allowing the market to dictate the parking needed for a particular project, which would mean not having a parlcing requiremenfi in the DUC Zone. This could be an incentive fora residential developer to take advantage of the commuter rail station and limit the amount of required , tenant parking. Staff confirmed for the Committee that there was a pilot project for an incentive to provide fewer parking stalls ifithe developer provided Smart Cars or charging stations for electrical vehicles. Committee expressed concem that on prior projects, it was assumed that senior housing needed less parking.. It was felt that the parking was not adequate for visitors and employees of the senior housing. Interim Director Kevin Snyder responded that senior housing projects usually have federal/state funding and, as - such, capital is spent on the building rather than parking. Committee agreed that reducing parking and encouraging mass transit is what the federal and state govemments are:pushing municipalities towards. However, the concem is with the gap befinreen where the City is now `and getting to where the City will need to be eventually: Committee agreed that they did not want to make any parking decisions that would discoutage citizens from coming to.the downtown area. Staff suggested looking at an incentive based approach initially: Then build caveats that should a developer provide parking, it would have to be done in a way that doesn't negatively impact the downtown. Staff will bring some ides to a future meeting on how the proposed parking might work. Bicvcle Routes Vice Chair Singer asked staff for the reasoning for removing parking on the south. side of the parking garage (1st Street NV1n while there is parking a blockeasf on the south side of the hospital. Staff indicated that #he parking on the south sid"e of the hospital was not part of redevelopment of One Main Street Building and, therefore, was not removed. The City's bike route maps shows 1St Street as a future bicycle route as shown in the City's Transportation Comprehensive Plan. Right now, the City - does nof have sufficient width in the right-of-way for a bicycle route plus on-street parking because of the northwesf comer of Aubum Avenue and 1St Street, which is the southeast comer of the hospital block. The City would like to see this intersection redeveloped, widened and made straight. Development by the hospital or other downtown developer may generafe some opportunities to do this and it is on the Public Works' lis#. Once this is completed, the road would be able to accommodate Class 2 bicycle corridors.,Committee asked that; staff find out what the options are and bring back to a future committee meeting: , Traffic Study - A Sfreet SE Staff will provide the Commitfee with an update on the traffic analysis at the February 8, 2010 meeting. Page 5 of 6 Downtown Redevelopment Committee Minutes Januarv 26. 2010 Liqhtinq Staff has been working on with the Kim Lighting Company to have a sample light that „ Committee previously chose installed for Committee's review. Staff has also been communicating with Kim Lighting Company about what fixtures they offer for energy- efficient lighting that would work with the chosen light. - Control Boxes At the October 27, 2009 meeting, the Committee supported staff s recommendation to establish standards for traffic signal control boxes in the downtown area, The Committee Volunteered to research the Inferhef and forward information to staff. Public Works staff will provide the Committee with the specs in terms of the required sizes and space and other particulars needed for the control boxes to assist in their _ reseacch. Staff will add this fopic to the February 8, 2010 agenda. Communitv Renewal , Vice Chair Singer reported on a recent article in the Tacoma News Tribune newspaper regarding condemnation of private property for economic development. Attorney General Rob McKenna and a;group of Washington lawmakers want to tighfen the state's eminent domain laws to prevent private property from being taken for economic development. It is illegal to condemn private property for economic development, and fwrther, fhe City Council would not support it if it was IegaL Citv Hall Plaza Desiqn City staff will be meeting on January 27, 2010 to discuss the 2010 capital projects and allocation of resources. Staff will updafe the Committee on City Hall Plaza. Phase I at the February 9, 2010 meeting. IV. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Downtown Redevelopment Committee, Chair Norman adjoumed the meeting at 5:15p.m. , - - PPROVED T IS -I~ DAY OF FEBRUARY 2010. Lyn an, Chair R e S. Tobias; Planning Secretary Page 6 of 6