City Council Agenda and Packet 2019 02 05

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes January 22, 2019 Page 3 of 16 Dalton noted the LRC has brought forward this conceptual design for discussion of location, size and cost but not design or architecture. The LRC feels increased parking downtown could be a catalyst for development. The LRC believes using tax increment financing could be used to cover a significant amount of building a parking structure. Dalton stated downtown has not seen redevelopment because construction costs are high, lots are small, redevelopment projects that meet zoning are not be large enough to achieve construction efficiencies; two and even three-story developments don't provide return on investment. Properties are difficult to design to meet zoning and parking requirements on site. Of seven projects that have been approved, five have not been completed for some or all of those reasons. Most investment downtown has been the small expansions of existing space that do not trigger parking requirements. Payments of the fee in lieu have not been spent to build parking. Additional supply is one of the few ways to eliminate the neighborhood impacts. If Council determines a parking structure is needed it could be done as part of the eclectic and organic downtown development without conflict with the character. Andy Johnson, 922 Main Street, representing the consulting team of DAJ Design and Desman Design Management, noted these are conceptual and are studies to see what is possible in size, capacity and height within the parameters of this specific site. Johnson reviewed the parking lot in question between Main Street and Front Street. He reviewed design considerations including the alley, utility relocation, the Voltage land swap, the connection between Main and Front, the core and transition area of the downtown design guidelines. He noted they are presenting an east/west option and a north/south option and there are pros and cons of each. East/west design would have a setback from the northern buildings, entry from Front Street, with one floor below grade and three above. It would be a net gain of 277 spaces. All of the heights fall within the downtown design guidelines heights. North/south options 2 and 3. Option 3 has a 26-foot setback from Front and includes an additional 1/2 level below ground. Johnson reviewed the three option comparisons. Option one is the highest cost, option 2 is higher above ground, option 3 raises the cost but has better massing. The team did look at maintenance and operation; they are largely based on the size of the structure with option three having the lowest overall cost in those areas. Councilmember Stolzmann noted the current lot has 101 spaces on it. She asked if more parking could be fit on that lot as it is not optimized. She asked how many more spaces could be added. Johnson stated an estimate would be perhaps 8 additional spaces.