Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDowntown Development Authority - Minutes - 09/07/2000Mary Brayton, Chair 484-1401 (W) Chuck Wanner, Council Liaison 484-0810 (H) Anne Garrison, Staff Liaison 484-2020 (W) DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Regular Directors' Meeting MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 7, 2000 REGULAR MEETING The Board of Directors of the Downtown Development Authority met in regular session at 7,30 a.m. on September 7, 2000 in the conference Room at Home State Bank, 303 East Mountain Avenue. PRESENT There were present: Mary Brayton, Chair Steve Slezak Greg Belcher Carey Hewitt John Pitner Margaret Brown Chuck Wanner ABSENT Larry Stroud, Vice Chair Jason Meadors, Secretary/Treasurer STAFF Jay Hardy, Executive Director Anne Garrison Lucia Liley, Counsel GUESTS John Fischbach, Bill Sears, David Short, Susanne Durkin -Schindler, Bud Frick, Alan Krchmarik, Ron Phillips CALL TO ORDER Ms. Brayton called the meeting to order at 7.35 a.m. and roll call was taken. APPROVAL OF Mr. Slezak moved to adopt the minutes of August 3, 2000 as written. The MINUTES motion was seconded by Mr. Pitner and carried unanimously. DDA MINUTES PAGE MASON STREET In her presentation, Ms. Durkin -Schindler unrolled a long map of the corridor TRANSPORTATION PLAN which begins at the south end, beyond Harmony Road, and moves north to Downtown. An interesting and detailed explanation followed, and it was noted that the planning had evoked a great deal of interest and involvement on the part of the community. Most residents along the route were positive. It is believed that this draft represents what the public wants to take place. Negotiations are in process with Burlington Northern regarding a no cost lease for its related right of ways, which will provide safe crossings. Discussions continue on whether or not the Mason Street Corridor should go from one to two way in downtown. If it is one way, the cost involves a contra bike lane and the addition of parking to compensate for 86 lost spaces. If a two way street is determined, the existing parking would not be lost. Although not available at our meeting, a draft Master Plan has been generated and on October 3, Council will be asked to adopt this plan. Funding is available to begin at the south end, but the earliest time it is anticipated funding for the north will be available is 2004. Signalization and signage are some of the costs at the north end. FY 2001 BUDGET Mr. Hardy referred the Board to the proposed budget contained in the packets, and advised that at the recommendation of the Executive Board, all items had been increased by5%with the exception of the Insurance categories, which tl4e City indicated would increase by as much as 15%. The Income portion of DDA's finances, Mr. Hardy stated, can also be made available to the Board, and Mr. Wanner asked if it could be included in next month's package. Alan Krchmarik has received proposals from a number of underwriting firms anxious to do business with the Downtown Development Authority and refinance existing bonds. Mr. Krchmarik suggests tracking the percentages offered by these and other companies closely, and possibly taking advantage of them next year. The Budget reviewed by the Board today will be presented again next month for final approval, and then brought before City Council for its consideration. Staff reviews will be complete by late October/early November. GROWTH t TAX Initiatives #205 and #256 were introduced by Mr. Hardy, who requested Mr. Krchmarik provide additional information as needed, since both of these are weighty issues which need careful consideration by the Board. Initiative #r205, otherwise known as Amendment #21 or Tax Cut 2000 has its genesis in Douglas Bruce. Passage of this would be an amendment to the State Constitution. In that State wide vote, local communities would lose elements of control. Mr. Krchmarik explained that a Property Tax Bill could have 6 - 7 line items, each leveraging $25 per item, the following year it would be $50, the next year $75 and entities such as the DDA, Poudre Fire Authority, Poudre School District, etc., would simply go away. The ability of the State to backfill these needs is limited, and has constraints relating to the Tabor Amendment. DDA MINUTES • • PAGE GID and the City would be seriously impacted and ownership tax would be wiped out in the first year. InlHative #r256 - Citizen Management of Growth. Mr. Hardy referred the Board to a publication in the package on Land Use Development and another entitled 'Sprawl Costs Us All' prepared by the Sierra Club. The latter document is the basis of the ballot initiative. Ms. Liley explained that this is a Constitutional Amendment, and from a legal standpoint, there is some uncertainty about what the language means. If change is needed later, it will be difficult to amend other than going through a constitutional amendment process. Primarily, it dictates that all local government, which is basically every city, town and county can only approve developments in accordance with the terms. A few exceptions exist for towns under one thousand, such as Timnath and counties that are under 25,000. Essentially, it defines two areas in which growth can occur. A committed area and a growth area. A committed area is defined in one of three ways. A. If you have a valid development application pending as of September 13, 2000. (This type of application is not yet defined.) B. If you are within an area that is already developed. In this case, most of the structures have been built and most of the water and sewer services have been extended. However, these areas must be mapped, and the mapping process must take place by December 31, 2001 or within a year of the effective date. Thus it is possible, that even if you are in a committed place development may still not be possible until the mapping process is complete. There may, of course, be exceptions to this regulation. C. If you do not fall within a committed area, you can only proceed if you are within what is termed a growth area. If this posses, what every city, town and county must do is develop Growth Maps. Each jurisdiction must coordinate with other jurisdictions so there is no overlapping and there is no time limit for the growth area mapping to be done. The earliest these could be completed and brought to the voters in November 2001, and they may only be amended once a year. There will be some fiscal requirements involved in the preparation of disclosures for these maps. Impacts to the citizenry must be analyzed and they must be provided with information prior to the vote. Mr. Krchmarik addressed the fiscal impact. It may affect building permits for the next 8 - 12 months forcing an immediate slowdown, which translates to approximately two million dollars in sales tax and building permit revenue. Then, once the work stated earlier is complete, we would see them coming back up to speed. Mr. Fischbach advised that Council will consider a resolution regarding this issue on September 19, 2000. However, he noted that the P & Z Board may pass a resolution in favor of the initiative. After some discussion, the Board requested Mr. Hardy prepare resolutions in opposition to both initiatives for review at the next meeting. In the event additional information is received which changes the Board's point of view, the resolutions could easily be modified to reflect it. INT'LMUSEUW Earlier, the Board approved the expenditure of $10,000 to fund a feasibility IMAX STUDY study for the International Museum and IMAX Theatre to be matched by the private sector. No one entity was capable of doing both, which is the DDA MINUTES • • PAGE 4 reason for the two separate studies. In all, thirty three people attended five focus groups and a great deal of information was made available from a variety of sources, including performance estimates by the developer, based on four previous exhibits. Museum - Demographics, impact on schools, general perception of size and scope of project were all positive. Concern was expressed over the size of the facility, and whether or not there is support to take the project all the way through the process. The developers are believed to be about a week away from closing on a building downtown. They are also in the process of bringing a large display from Russia to what they view as temporary quarters, and we consider a test site. [MAX Theatre - The feasibility study was done by a fine which has completed eighty similar projects. From a financial perspective, it would work in either a non profit or for profit setting. As a stand-alone project this would cost about $6.3 million and would seat approximately 240 rather than the 300 envisioned by the developer. Referencing the market size, attendance projection is slightly lower than estimated by the developer. The Discovery Center is looking for a new home, and may prove to be the coponent needed to round out the Museum. Ms. Brayton suggested that if there are no time sensitive issues, this may provide a good topic for discussion at the Board retreat. LPC REPORT Bud Frick, standing in for Angela Milewski, reported on discussions which are underway for the Transportation Center. In addition, some designations have been awarded, the brick on the Armory building generated a couple of special meetings, and the Preston farmhouse has been approved by LPC and restoration will begin soon. SUITE 152 PATIO Patio approval was first given in 1997, however during construction, the area was expanded beyond Board approved boundaries. Exhibits A & B are included in the packets, and the request before the Board today is for the expanded portion only. Discussion immediately centered on maintenance issues. Now operating as a night club, the patio sits vacant at lunch time, duct tape holds together table umbrellas, and broken menu holders remain unrepaired. Board suggestions were varied: • Approve the additional space subject to maintenance requirements ' Send a letter requiring maintenance concerns be addressed . Allow owner time to deal with maintenance issues. To be in full compliance within two weeks and to cease use until that time because of liability issues. Mr. Wanner then moved that the Board do everything possible to cause the owner to cease operation on the unapproved portion of the patio. Improvements to be removed if he is not in compliance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hewitt. Following some discussion, Mr. Wanner withdrew his motion. Mr. Wanner then made a motion that DDA require an immediate halt to the use of space not approved by the Board. That a letter be directed to the DDA MINUTES • PAGE owner requiring a clean up of the patio and listing specific requirements which must be met in a period of 30 days, before approval of the extension can be given. Failure to comply puts the existing agreement in jeopardy. Furthermore, barriers should be put in place to prevent liquor being served in the unapproved portion of the patio. If conditions are not met, the permanent structure will have to be removed. Mr. Hewitt seconded the motion which carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS JUSTICE CENTER The Grand Opening of the new Justice Center will take place on September 14, 15 and 16, 2000. MULBERRY/LEMAY ANNEXATION This important issue will be presented to City Council on October 17, and November 7, 2000 respectively. The Board is earnestly requested to attend. RETREAT-2000 November 9 or 16 were offered as possible dates for the DDA annual retreat, and the Board decided on November 16, 2000. As a result no meeting will be held on the regularly scheduled date of November 2, 2000. MURAL - WRIGHT LIFE BUILDING As a result of Wright Life's plans to rebuild in the near future, a new home is being sought for the mural. The Board is asked to consider a suitable place or even a temporary site for the artwork. NEW COUNTY FACILITIES Mr. Slezak asked if the Board felt DDA should be represented, and Ms. Brayton agreed to follow up on that question. ADJOURN There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 10:10 a.m. Jason Meadors, Secretary