Update on DMP Development – October 2009
MEMO – October 29, 2009
TO: Downtown Management Plan Steering Committee
FROM: Karl Eberhard, Manager Community Design and Redevelopment Program
RE: Update on DMP Development – October 2009
As you are aware, the general program for October’s meetings was primarily to introduce the project and people and to start various conversations about the different aspects of the Downtown Management Plan that need further development. It was a successful month in that all of the focus groups met, two of the public outreach meetings were held, and no significant issues arose. Please find following a brief update for each subject area.
Capital Improvements:
This is one of two “staff only” groups with the Steering Committee serving as the public component of the discussion. The group met on the 22nd and discussed the Consultant’s recommendation for achieving at least 60 new spaces, for less than $20,000, and in the spring. Traffic Program Staff is working internally to develop plans for re-striping the streets which will allow us to accomplish this task at a low cost and also to evaluate the possibilities as we proceed. We discussed that some detail might be available when the group meets again on the 12th of November.
Data:
This group met on the 15th. By that time, City GIS Staff had already converted the boundary map to a parcel-based map and had also changed Zone 1 to extend to, but also to end at, Route 66. The group further discussed the boundary of Zone 1 such that it would extend around the whole Heritage Square block and possibly the next block or two to the west. This was a great introduction to the study of all of the boundaries.
The group also discussed the parcel database that generated the postcard mailing lists in light of the “Return to Sender” cards. The return rate was not notable, but does identify database needs. The GIS Staff and Garrick Brooks will continue to refine the data as it will ultimately be the database for the district formation needs.
Incorporation and Management:
The meeting on 8th was short-staffed as some stakeholders were at the important quiet-zone meetings in Phoenix. However, since then, some group members have met informally and progress has been made, notably in getting information about specialists that can assist with the work and starting to noodle out what the organization can be and what the pros and cons of different configurations would be. As there are several examples of such districts in Arizona, and a variety of types, these are serving as principle case studies for our efforts.
General concern discussions centered on avoiding districts that require 100% consent or that require “slum and blight” designations. The specific issue of whether or not PBID employees can serve as parking enforcement staff was discussed based on a belief that they need to be City employees in order to write tickets. The legal component of the group will be researching this and the discussion will continue.
The November meeting will achieve the introduction purpose and may have more detailed issue information based on the intent to have a conference call with the specialists identified. Julie Pasterick and Bob Montoya have been added to this group.
Land Development Code:
This is the other “staff only” group that has the Steering Committee serving as the public component of the discussion. The group met briefly on the 13th and agreed that regular meetings were not necessary, only needing to meet as often as required to make sure the two projects are coordinated. Further, the group agreed that the proposals of the Downtown Management Plan are not in conflict with the Land Development Code Re-write goals or plans.
There was discussion of what to with residential proposals in Zone 1 in light of the “No Parking Allowed” concept. The issue being a question of penalizing residential uses by requiring parking versus overwhelming the parking supply by allowing residential uses to rely on the public garages for parking. Further discussion is clearly needed as is discussion and input from the Steering Committee.
Maintenance and Other Services:
Meeting on the 22nd, this group made great progress this month. For the most part, in advance of the meeting, City staff provided inventories of the enhanced services they provide and associated costs. The introduction included the intent to use this inventory to establish a maintenance contract and a budget for the PBID. The public stakeholders were charged with brainstorming the service upgrades and additions that the district would want included. The initial inventory is being further developed to include basic municipal services and the data will also need to be adjusted to match the district boundaries (Much of the data is keyed to the former, smaller, Main Street boundaries). To develop the inventory in time for the next meeting, staff has been meeting in smaller groups to fill-in, clarify, and expand the inventory.
Parking Operations:
Also referred to as “Meters, Permits, and Enforcement”, this group met on the 15th, starting with a background presentation on prior permit parking efforts. The group discussed the citizen proposal for a simple program that assigns residential or business users to one side of the street respectively. The group expressed a desire for simplicity, even if that means re-thinking the previous efforts, and the group commented favorably on the citizen proposal. The discussion included an introduction to the subject of “the quantity of permits issued”, with an idea of unlimited issuance, thus allowing the spaces themselves to be the limiting factor. Also introduced was the concept of using private lots more heavily within the “parking solutions” portion of the plan.
The issue of enforcement staff employment (from Incorporation and Management Focus Group) was discussed (See above).
And, Jeff Bauman, City traffic Engineer, was added to the group. NAIPTA participation was briefly discussed, especially if garage number 2 ends up being a transfer station, which would be consistent with earlier NAIPTA goals. Follow-up: NAIPTA will be presenting their latest plans to the Steering Committee.
Public Outreach:
Two public outreach meetings were held this month. Each was preceded by a postcard mailing. Though open to all, the first was addressed to Zone 1, and was held at Big Foot BBQ and hosted by Mark Lamberson and John VanLandingham (with food). The second, also open to all, was addressed to Zone 2, held at City Hall, and hosted by John VanLandingham. The response rate was around 4% – not bad considering industry standard response rate to mass-mailing is closer to 2%. Each had important stakeholders in attendance and Steering Committee members initiated discussions in addition to the more formal presentation.
There was some discussion at the prior Steering Committee meeting and offline regarding the public outreach – specifically if it should be broader or not. The current strategy has been to finish the engagement of the potential PBID members before rolling out any specifics to the general public. Secondarily the discussion included whether or not there should be more development of detail prior to outreach efforts. While this has merit, the current strategy allows broader input to the development of the plan.
Staff for the Planning and Zoning Commission has asked for a DMP presentation for the commission. While we have confirmed our ability to make such a presentation, the Steering Committee may wish to discuss the presentation, perhaps considering the use of the same “hosted” format that has been used for the public outreach.
Closing note:
Finally, the City has found much needed funding for postcards, postage, and other ancillary needs at this point in the process.
Comments