Loading...
2016-12-14 Economic Development Commission PacketOr E1)Alo I89a AGENDA Edmonds Economic Development Commission Edmonds City Hall Brackett Meeting Room, 121 5th Ave N Wednesday, December 14, 2016 6-8PM 6:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Agenda (2.5 minutes) 3. Approval of November 16, 2016 Meeting Summary (2.5 minutes) 4. Audience Comments (5 minutes) 5. Subgroup Reports: a. Civic Field (5 minutes) b. Downtown Parking (memo attached) (10 minutes) c. Highway 99 ( 5 minutes) d. Future Priorities (memo attached) (30 minutes) 6. Old Business: a. Sign Code (15 minutes) 7. New Business: 8. Roundtable Discussion (Council, Commissioners, City, Liaisons) (15 minutes) 9. Ideas for January Agenda (10 minutes) 10. Adjourn Next regular meeting: January 18, 2017, 6 PM DRAFT CITY OF EDMONDS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION November 16, 2016 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Jamie Reece Darrol Haug Matthew Waldron Michael Schindler Nicole Hughes Stephen Clifton George Bennett Neil Tibbott, Councilmember, ex officio Greg Urban, Edmonds Chamber, ex officio Nathan Monroe, Planning Board, ex officio COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Mary Monroe Aseem Prakash Bruce Faires, Port Commissioner, ex-officio STAFF PRESENT Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Cindi Cruz, Program Coordinator 1. The Economic Development Commission meeting called to order at 6:04 p.m. 2. Approval of Agenda. Added in discussion of property tax by Neil Tibbott. Move 9. City Report to follow Item 4 3. Approval of 10/19/16 EDC Minutes. Matt moved to accept minutes as written. George seconded; motion passed. 4. Audience Comments No comments. 9. City Report Patrick provided update on: Highway 99 open house held last Thursday, November 10. Consultants will continue working on plan, potential adoption in first quarter 2017, elements of plan include: standardize zoning along Highway 99, proposing consolidation of CG zone, 75 feet versus current 60 feet height limit. Multi -family zoning would be included in commercial zone allowing the multi -family zoning to abut residential zoning and adding the increase in height to 75 feet. There is currently not enough ROW for safe and/or comfortable walkways so it is proposed to increase the setback to 10 feet for properties abutting the highway. This will add a pedestrian feel with space for benches, walkways, and ability to create a comfortable walkway. Incentives could include multi -family tax exemption, more assertive and aggressive zoning, federal financing, CDBG money, waiver of fees, etc. A potential pilot project could have the City partnering or purchasing property with a private developer to create an impact development for Highway 99 area. City could lead the way and emphasize what could occur with new zoning. This would be an aggressive way to kick start development. Downtown parking: Enforcement has been stepped increased due to temporarily rehiring a retired parking enforcement officer in August. There has been a spike in ticket writing and now the increase in tickets is dropping so the theory is increased enforcement is working. We need to correct the assumption that parking ticket fines are discounted by 50% if paid within 24 hours. This is not true as the discount was eliminated by Council action in 2013. Also there is an escalation of parking fines if you receive up to 3 in one year. The BID is working on creating "Good Neighbor" private parking lots with businesses that have parking lots available in evening for general parking. Draft Meeting Summary Economic Development Commission November 16, 2016 Page 1 DRAFT Civic Field — coming back to Council in December. General: Business attraction event on November 29, 2016. Sent out 75 invitations. Bob Drewel, WSU is keynote speaker, Ten Gun Design business, Juliana Van Buskirk from Chamber may attend, Tom Mesaros will represent City Council. Holiday market is every Saturday through December 17. Council Neil gave update on City Council: CC is supportive of more enforcement on parking. Recommendations put forward on parking will be considered by CC. Mayor has also asked that directors start working on issues related to parking. Discussed impact fees related to Highway 99 will substantially increase for developers but could provide a discount for anyone providing affordable housing on Highway 99. Walking and biking is an economic draw for community. The Edmonds Street Connector, alternative to the at -grade crossings, is supported by CC and Mayor and will depend on financing, it would increase the walking and tourism for waterfront by providing the accessible walkway/bikeway. Update on sign code regulation: forming a sub- committee on signage for downtown business owners. Enforcement of signs is on hold until February. Directional signage for businesses within the downtown core is estimated at $150,000. 5. Report from subgroups: a. Highway 99 Subarea Planning Process: Matt: have not met since the open house last week. Patrick will schedule a meeting of this subarea group. Analysis of City offices and police office relocated to Highway 99. Could City be the lead? Property owners at 2201' & Highway 99 are waiting for Highway 99 subarea planning process completion before substantial development of property. b. Downtown Parking: Darrol: residential parking permits, 3 separate zones, central, south and north residential zones. Process is to buy permit that goes on vehicle, sold on yearly basis, 300 permits, cost is $.50 per week. Two per house plus two guest permits are available. There are 550 employee permits, $50 per year, permits are hanging tags. How does police prioritize enforcement? There are 1000 tickets issued per year historically, encourage active enforcement, 15 tickets per day, these include parking enforcement, parked on curb, no parking zone, etc. Police Chief has list of violators that park in front of their own businesses, no priority but just increase in enforcement. Preferred: '/z time enforcement is really 1/4 time enforcement. Could you up enforcement temporarily for 6 months? Monitor at mid -year to see if that is effective or not before committing to creating an FTE. Chief will be responding to Council at 11/22/16 meeting. Would like opinion of EDC before forming his comments to council. Cannot contract out for this position due to union restrictions. Chief has reluctance in tying revenue to position. Technology could play a role; while expensive, Chief would not be opposed to trying. Could increase some parking availability by striping parking spaces. When fully staffed there are two FTE's with 30/70 parking/animal control split. It is difficult to devote time to parking enforcement when pulled off for other more emergent animal control issues. Multi -pronged approach could include letter to business owners explaining value of not parking in front of your own business (chamber and/or BID). Be cautious of over -enforcement. Sometimes problem is not as big as it could be — safety is imperative. Timing of enforcement is another consideration. Recommend half-time parking enforcement on temporary basis, look where tickets are predominant, and striping. There is an interdepartmental staff team working on parking and will be considering many different components. Employee and residential parking permits should be reviewed. Employee parking zones are too close to downtown core. Recommend they be moved out from core. Other things are in original recommendation. Patrick will report back from city interdepartmental team and will want to include someone from EDC and BID on this team. George will draft a memo and e- mail to Jamie & Darrol. Request quarterly updates on ticketing — to answer where, why, and Draft Minutes Economic Development Commission November 16, 2016 Page 2 DRAFT when. Explore non -enforcement options. Good neighbor program proposed by BID. Matt moved and Mike seconded to have memo written by parking sub -group motion passed. Darrol mentioned courtesy ticket process they have in Chelan — first ticket is free as a courtesy perhaps this could be used here. c. Civic Field Master Planning Process: Nicole: subgroup reviewed proposal and plan met many of desires, sports elements, maximum use for activities, not single use limitations, flexibility. Darrol stated that EDC opinions were considered in plan. Already decided to move skateboard park away from residential, tennis courts are multi -use, water feature but not spray park, big field will be marked for soccer and used for other sports. Better plan that original concepts, could be worth expressing there is a much better plan by EDC. Survey went out to request more uses of fields. Patrick read memo from subgroup. memo — could come from EDC — encourage flexibility. Boys & Girls Club move. Nicole moved Stephen seconded to have Patrick send memo motion passed. 6. Report from Liaisons: b. Planning Board: Nathan - Civic Field process is moving forward, meeting on SMP. c. Port: Bruce absent d. Chamber of Commerce: Greg - tree lighting on November 26, holiday market will also be happening, that day is also small business Saturday encouraging shop local. 7. Old Business: a. Discussion of Data & Background Information already discussed. 8. New Business: a. New Work Items for Sub -groups review of potential work items, what to shift focus on for subgroup work. Examples of future sub -group topics: growth management background information, port versus city in regards to economic development, Harbor Square and review of potential development, review studies on economic development, should studies and information be updated for City. Create new group to review topics and determine what the sub -groups should focus on. Darrol, George, Nicole & Stephen will meet together: Matt moved George seconded to create subgroup to bring back items to next meeting motion passed. b. Sign Code - bring back to EDC before 120 days are up for review. c. Discussion of Property Tax - not discussed. 10. Commissioner's Corner — Question if bank is coming in at old post office? There will be a bank and also a restaurant. December meeting should be changed to December 14 George moved, Matt seconded to move to December 14. Location will be determined. Adjourn: 8:02 p.m. Next regular meeting: December 14, 2016, 6 PM Draft Minutes Economic Development Commission November 16, 2016 Page 3 Parking information Summary Dec. 8, 2016 Prepared by Darrol Haug The intention of this memo is to provide revised parking data and some added ideas for allocating parking around town. The new data comes from discussion with Scott James, Finance Director, Scott Passey, City Clerk, Phil William, PW Director, Patrick Doherty, Economic Development Director and Chief Al Compaan and Dave Teitzel, City Council. There are several policy options that will be presented at the end. Clearly more information is needed to augment and clarify the information presented. Some of this has already been discussed but is added here to help wrap up our work on parking. More work can and should be done to help you make the best parking policies possible. Parking in Edmonds is like the old story of a blind person touching an elephant. Depending on where you touch it you get a different picture of what is going on. There are several moving parts to the problem. While there are important issues outside of downtown this research relates to the area bounded by the Water to 71h and Pine to Casper. Some of this area served by residential and employee permits and is the area that has time limits for parking, generally 3 hours that is in force from midnight to 6pm, an 18 hour window. A smaller subset of this area serves the business core and for this discussion is bounded by Sunset to 6th and Edmonds St. to Walnut St. I will call the larger area DT Zone and the small area the Business Core. Most of the issues we have discussed relate to the BC. The larger DTZ borders on the BC and can play a role in policy development. Complaints about parking are in both the DTZ and the BC but most issues relate to the BC. The BID has studied parking and have some good ideas about how to improve the inventory of stalls and the utilization of existing stalls with the good neighbor program. Basically, folks are complaining they cannot find parking in the BC. In times past they could park in the same block as their destination and now they have to drive around to find a spot. More people are competing for stalls and that is the price of a vibrant down town. Our current policies do not maximize the use of the available stalls for our tourist friends and local Edmonds folks, new ideas may be in order. All ideas will have upsides and downsides and tradeoffs. So, what are the goals articulated by the EDC and BID: 1. Add more parking stalls to the BC ... 10,25, 100? 2. Utilizes what we have better ... churn, spacing, economics? Let's look at some of the facts uncovered so far. New parking garage. $30,000 per stall so a 100-stall facility would cost $3m and the daily cost per stall to retire that investment would be out of line with the public's willingness to pay. We could do the numbers but compared with free a block or two away from the destination few would be willing to pay the needed rate to make the investment profitable. In the BC we have 350 to 450 street stalls and several off street lots which add to the total inventory. No attempt has been made to quantify the total stalls in all of the DT Zone only the estimate for the BC, There are 10-15 stalls per block. More work can be done here to shore up this estimate. Driving around and looking at maps is helpful but what really are the total available stalls? The 450 slots on the street in the BC have lots of competition for use. Free parking for 3hr and if ticketed for overtime the fine is $40. But only if we do enforcement. But we allocate these stalls in other ways as well. We have Employee and Residential Permits that can park in parts of the BC and the DTZ. We have 550 Employee permits targeted in the BC and 396 annual Residential permit holders with about 600 permits and an unknown number of additional guest permits given to those with Residential Permits. More on these permits later but between Employee and Residential permits we have 1150 competing for the limited stalls in the BC and DTZ. We also have several business owners parking for long periods of time in front of their businesses. We have a list of folks but it is not clear what if anything we are doing to convince them park elsewhere. Some enforcement information. The old business model of split time of and enforcement officer doing animal control and parking produced 1000 tickets per year or about 3-4 per day. With the current part time model with 20 hours per week dedicated to enforcement the ticket rate has increased to 15 per day. With a $40 fine, 200 days and uncollectables at 25% this would be the annual revenue for different enforcement outcomes. 3 tickets/day produces $18,000 annually; 5 tickets produce $30k, 8 tickets produce $48k, and 10 tickets produce $60k. More enforcement may create more compliance and less ticketing. We have little data. Posted hours of enforcement is 18hrs a day... Midnight to 6pm. The current part time enforcement model of would average 4 hours a day. With today's model of chalk the tire, back again in an hour to chalk new ones and a second chalk for cars still in place and so on. A 4-hour work day would ticket only the first and maybe second ones marked. For example, chalking at 9 would not produce a ticket until 12. Hard to know how a part time enforcement person would produce much enforcement. So what is the value of a space. Here are some examples from around town. The business community says a space is worth $100,000 per year or $333 a day. Port rents space for $125 a month or $6.25 a day. Lot by ferry is $200 a month or $10 a day. On a daily basis that same space is $15. The City lot behind Chanterelles is $100 a month or $5 a day. Employees permits go for $50 per year and produce about $25,000 per year or less than $.25 a day. Residential permits go for $25 a year and produce about $15,000 year or $.07 a day. Employee permits run January to December while Residential permits run for 12 months from time of purchase. Clearly there is value to a space but how should we price the various uses. Another way to look at supply and demand of stalls. A stall in the Core if used to the limits of our existing ordinance would allow only 3 uses in the time from 9 to 6. Changing to a two-hour limit would increase the use to 5 times and a one -hour limit would increase that to 9 times. We would get double or triple the use in the Core. Observations by driving around town suggest we each could do a better job of parking to take up less space. I have randomly check streets within 2 blocks of the fountain and on every check people have not parked as close as they could to the corners or other cars. My multi day study would suggest we could gain 1 car per side of the street per block or about 5-7% more cars parked. We could do a better study and Phil Williams has said it would not be too difficult to put tick marks on a couple of blocks to show people the suggested location for a car. No enforcement, just gentle persuasion. Enough for the data what should we do? Here are some ideas. As the Chief said to me during our interview. We need to create a Holistic Approach. A little of everything may go a long way to improving the situation. 1. Agree on a goal. Maybe: "Increase actual number of stalls available and develop methods to increase the use of existing stalls" 2. Stalls have value, lets decide how to set better rates to reflect that value and raise city revenues. Move pricing for permits closer to market value. 3. Employee parking is $.25 a day, put a plan together that over say 3 years takes the rate to at least a $1 a day or $200 a year. Also consider moving Employee parking area a block further from the core. Changing the zones would increase available stalls by 50 to 100. 4. Residential parking is $.07 a day!! On average, each permit owner has 1.5 permits. Raise the cost for the first permit to $.50 a day over 3 years and to $1-2 for each extra permit. Raises city revenues, allocates spaces better. Would free up some spaces and would increase revenues. 5. Have Phil put some tick marks on a couple of streets and monitor. If it works we could gain a few spaces. Expand if it works. Place reminder cards on window for education rather than fines. 6. Business owners parking in front of businesses??? Enforcement, enforcement. 7. Regular enforcement. Ask the Chief how best to build a model to increase enforcement. More officer hours, reduce the current 18-hour window, look at the code to see how is it is written today. It says something about 3 hours in same area including across the street is a violation, not just 3 hours in same space. Why 3 hours? Seems too long for the core where we want more churn. How do we enforce that without new license plate reader technology? Subcontract to outside company? We can see what others are doing and evaluate how it would work in Edmonds 8. Work with the BID to gain access to business parking lots earlier in the late day. 5pm vs 7pm would give a few more stalls to the first seating at dinner. 9. Signs, Signs, Signs. We have available space in areas that folks just do not know about. No directional and even if you are right at the lot what does it say about parking. We are talking about signs for enhancing business so why not talk about signs that would direct to parking. 10. If you move forward on more enforcement, then we could offer a new type of pass. For example, if you went to one hour in the core, 2 hours just beyond and 3 hour elseward you could "sell" new permits that would allow people to exceed the stated limit. Locals may happily pay to have 3-hour parking in the DT area. Revenue for the city, happy taxpayers, and a way to allocate space better. It's like a "get out of jail" card for a price. A Holistic approach may be to do 1,2, and 3 hour zones, tick marks for stalls, a little more enforcement, move employees further from core and move toward market rates, and raise residential permit prices, introduce a "get out of jail "card some signs to help direct and clarify parking you would do a lot to increase the actual spaces in town and would use the spaces more efficiently and also raise city revenues while using the pricing system to allocate scarce resources, a parking space. "F1C. 1 s9v TO: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FROM: GEORGE BENNETT, STEPHEN CLIFTON, DARROL HAUG & NICOLE HUGHES SUBJECT: PROPOSED NEXT WORK ITEMS FOR EDC DATE: DECEMBER 6, 2016 At the November EDC meeting a subgroup was established to convene and discuss next work items for the full EDC to take up. The subgroup met on 11/22/16 and studied the priorities established by the EDC earlier this year, proposing the following: Continuing Education As a way of providing a continuing source of education, familiarization, etc., to members on important topics, the group recommends that presentations, updates, and other forms of "continuing education" be made at each/most EDC meetings moving forward, possibly starting at the next available meeting with a primer on GMA and its status. After that we could hear from the Port about its role in economic development and its plans, etc. (probably hold off until things settle on the SMP issues). Another topic would be to have a presentation about the development regulations in different districts. Possible Subgroup Topics After reviewing the short-term (urgent and non -urgent) and long-term (urgent and non -urgent) priorities offered by the full EDC earlier this year, the group recommends that the following topics be considered for subgroups moving forward: Five Corners planning and development. This may include a study of the current development standards and how they might be discouraging appropriate redevelopment. Identify and study redevelopment sites. Instead of the 50 sites suggested in the EDC's original memo, the thought was to identify two or three key sites in one or two commercial districts, study them and identify what the potential is and barriers are to redevelopment, reporting back after each study, and then move onto another area(s) and two or three sites. Downtown development regulations that might be barriers to redevelopment, especially for a hotel and/or for 3-story, mixed -use development. The EDC memo offered the issue of the ground -floor retail requirements perhaps needing another study and reconsideration at this point (especially the 15' required ground -floor ceiling height).