Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEconomic Advisory Board - Minutes - 02/16/2022 ECONOMIC ADVISORY COMMISSION TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR February 16, 2022 4:00 – 6:00 pm Via Zoom 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 1  1. CALL TO ORDER 4:00 pm 2. ROLL CALL  List of Board Members Present o John Parks o Renee Walkup o Thierry Dossou o Blake Naughton o Denny Coleman o Aric Light o Mistene Nugent o Jeff Havens o Brauilo Rojas  List of Board Members Absent – Excused or Unexcused, if no contact with Chair has been made.  List of Staff Members Present o Josh Birks, Staff Liaison and Director, Economic Sustainability o Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Sr Project Manager o Shirley Peel, Councilmember, District 4 3. AGENDA REVIEW  No changes 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION  N/A 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  No changes 6. NEW BUSINESS  East Mulberry Corridor Plan and Annexation Feasibility NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 2   Presentation-Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Sr. Project Manager  Gave overall update; discussed why they take on annexations; went over goals, strategies, and big ideas; and discuss the annexation phasing decision making framework.  East Mulberry regionally connected over 500 businesses that are regionally, nationally, and internationally recognized. It contains the biggest industrial area in Northern Colorado and contains affordable residential neighborhoods. Annexation would be a way to connect East Mulberry to the rest of the city. Most annexation has gone south.  Future visions:  Livability - Attainable housing options - Vibrant economy with good jobs - Safety and stability  Community - A culture of open, honest communication - Commitment of equity, diversity, and inclusion - Strong public and private social services  Sustainability - Strong diverse economy - Careful management of growth and resources - Protection of the natural environment  Some character areas include north and south residential, Mulberry frontage, airpark/industrial, potential development, and gateway area to I-25.  Goals:  Dedicated and flexible space for industry  Safe and functional stormwater and transportation infrastructure  Integrated and connected community amenities and services  Protect and promote historic and natural features  Explore phased annexation of enclave  Recently added esthetics goal NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 3   Annexation and phasing scenario planning will get more specific with Council on March 8th, 2022.  Looked at Preliminary Fiscal impact estimate.  Discussion – Board  Q (Mistene) What is the City’s viewpoint on the area north of Vine and how does it relate to this plan?  A (Sylvia) That area is mostly regional water detention. It is jointly owned land that is not developable. It could be annexed as part of the process, but it is not developable.  Q (Mistene) Does that mean the City does not want to see development there? If someone were to submit a plan for development what would the consideration be?  A (Sylvia) Most of the time regional detention water areas are not meant to be developed because they are meant to hold water incase of a regional flood. Sylvia will follow up to get clarity.  Q (Renee) Are there plans for the gateway area yet?  A (Sylvia) CDOT still controls Mulberry and I-25. They have some very preliminary plans to redo the interchange; however, this could be years down the road. We do have I-25 design standards that would apply to that area. We are also looking at the surrounding land to find out what is most appropriate there. Our zoning is different from the County and that is how we could control land use and esthetics there. The plan is not going to address the full East Mulberry frontage and gateway. That will need to be a future full community-wide process and partnership with CDOT. We are currently looking at problematic areas.  Q (Aric) What is the residential populations of that area?  A (Sylvia) Right now, it is around 1,500-2,000. That area is big, but it is heavily industrial and commercial in nature.  Q (Aric) Is part of the plan to increase residential density?  A (Sylvia) That is something that could happen. We see existing neighborhoods staying as they are into the near future. There is a development planned for 1,600 units in the green fields north area that is currently algaculture land.  Q (Denny) Have you don a fiscal impact analysis for this area to understand NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 4  costs and benefits?  A (Sylvia) In short term, this is not a money maker for the City due to improvements needed and staffing increases for the area. Overall, these annexations have been seen as an investment now for future redevelopment.  Q (Mistene) Should there be a 6th goal that is related directly to esthetics?  A (Sylvia) Yes. It is tricky because we want to focus on the mitigating impacts to existing business but improve esthetics to an important gateway to our community. It is the front of house vs back of house, look where the heavier industrial will happen more behind the frontage. This is done through zoning, priorities, and design requirements. Q (Mistene) So you envision some possibility of zoning changes out there? A (Sylvia) Yes, through annexation there would already be a zoning change since we are different from the County. We are trying to find the most comparable. We just wouldn’t want heavy industrial along the frontage.  Q (Jeff) From a financial standpoint it looks like for the operating impacts you just took the one year and timed it by twenty to get the twenty-year mark. Do you anticipate everything to stay the same over 20 years?  A (Sylvia) Some of this is around the personnel cost that we would have overtime. This also assumes bringing it in all at once which we probably wouldn’t do, and it is assuming light development so light tax increases. It is a conservative estimate for assumptions.  A (Josh) The mix of uses out there right now is not one that creates a lot of revenue from a city perspective. Colorado is different in that the municipalities rely heavily on sales tax vs residential tax. It can also be misleading when focusing on a particular part vs. the broader community. You must pay attention to what role does this section play to the rest of the broader community as it can lead to economic benefit, not just in the annexed area but the broader community. Jeff agrees.  Q (Jeff) How does this process normally work; do you normally present the worst-case scenario, or do you have a positive approach?  A (Sylvia) This is a big and unprecedented decision to make. The last one did not include a full planning process. Council wants to make NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 5  sure we are making a good financial decision for the City. As a staff we are not trying to advocate one way or another, just talk about precedent and how we align some of the values and priorities in that area. We offer the best scenarios that fit that.  A (Josh) Our job is to present a reasoned and realistic view of what we think the impact will be, not to be one way or another. We must be clear about assumptions going in and that it isn’t going to just be roses. With annexation, the 1st decision is – yes, we are moving forward or no, we are not. When we decide yes, then we look at how.  Q (Renee) How is this annexation going to be attractive to businesses looking at our competitors of Denver and Colorado Springs?  A (Josh) That is one of the challenges we have. We have land that is not speaking to the market or even ready for the market and most business leads are looking to move faster than we can right now. This opportunity would add to that inventory, and some might like certain areas over others. It also helps present the City to future employers.  Q (Aric) In regard to the operating impacts on the preliminary fiscal impact estimate chart, how does it get paid for if it’s in the negative?  A (Josh) We will be upside-down since we will expand service and take over services but won’t have a way to recoup those costs like we normally can when development occurs. We must look at if other part of the community can offset this, such as sales tax.  Q (Shirley) Lived in the area that the SW annexation occurred and there are still things they have not gotten from the City. Are they going to be able to follow up with everything?  A (Sylvia) This annexation will have a plan process that the south enclave didn’t have. They have been able to do community outreach and have been clear that they will not see a lot of change in a 5–10- year timeframe unless some type of redevelopment occurs, and it is unlikely a large one will occur. Part of annexation is to get the process going.  A (Josh) One difference is there are sizable swap properties that face Mulberry that have a different kind of potential then lots in the SW enclave. They won’t have a windfall that they can just dump into this area to improve. Sometimes conditions can linger for decades because they are costly to retrofit.  Q (Jeff) Annexation sounds like it is inevitable. Once you get to this NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 6  point do you ever say no, or is this just what we do, and we have to figure out how to present the best fascial analysis?  A (Sylvia) It is a decision City Council has not made yet. We offer City Council a story around what it might mean and what benefits/drawbacks there are to annexing vs. not annexing. We have conversations to talk through expectations and assumptions. City Council wants to do it in a responsible way.  A (Josh) It is not inconceivable that City Council could say no. Staff is responsible for helping Council see with open eyes on what bringing additional property means to the community. There are a lot of variables that go into the decision. When this goes to Council there will be a more detailed report. Josh can share with the Board if there is interest.  Q (Mistene) In regard to esthetics and cost, how much is the City intending to burden vs. how much to push on developers and property owners? How do you envision rolling that out with existing property owners and the impacts to their properties? What is the standing on it in general and how it impacts cost?  A (Sylvia) Upon annexation, there is not an immediate requirement for upgrades. For instance, with sign code, they would have seven years to come up to standard. A lot of times it relates to development or redevelopment. Doing some work with land use code could mitigate some issues. We will try to decrease the burden by not overprocessing these. There are certain standards within the City that the County also has for street trees, sidewalks, etc. and they already have some new development in the area that had to go through those design standards. For the short term there is not really a lot on existing businesses for esthetic improvements.  A (Josh) This area includes an industrial section that is important to our economy that cannot go many other places in our community. There is discussion on zoning and regulations to preserve those uses and not put pressure on land value.  Comment (Denny) Annexation for Mulberry improvement is important for attracting and keeping workers and businesses that are looking for growth.  Comment (Sylvia) It is part of the story telling. This is an important corridor and gateway. Its keeping a balance to see these improvements and changes but keeping space for industrial NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 7  community and decrease burdens to help business stay as long as possible.  Q (Aric) Is there a recommendation at this point on writing a memo to Council?  A (Josh) The next interaction is a work session. At this point it is more of an introduction for you. With the Boards blessing, Sylvia could come back and bring forward specific recommendations and it would be better to weigh in and provide the boards perspective at that point. Renee agrees. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS  Shift to In-Person Meetings  (Renee) Held informal vote to move to in-person meetings. There will be a hybrid option to call in still. It was agreed to move forward with in-person meetings. Josh will send out the address for the meeting space. Parking is available in the front of City Hall or along the street. Josh will get more information on if they need a parking permit. Please advise Josh, Sarah, or Renee if you will not be in attendance so they can plan meal options.  Josh also gave expectation on excused and unexcused absences.  Nominations for Officer Positions  (Renee) Served as Chair since August 2021 and has been on the board for three years. She has a business background and owned her own business traveling internationally and helping companies grow. For the last two years she has been a full-time artist/business owner. She has enjoyed her role and would be willing to stay in the position or stay on the Board if someone else is interested in the role of Chair.  (John) Served as Vice Chair since August 2021 and has been on the Board since 2017. He has a background in education and working on getting his Masters. He has enjoyed his time on the Board and would be happy to continue in his role.  Formal vote will be in March. Duties include a monthly meeting (about 30 minutes) with Josh, midday on the 1st Wednesday of the month to plan the agenda for the upcoming meeting. If interested, please email Josh and Sarah expressing interest, explain why, and telling a little bit about yourself.  Renee and John are available if anyone has questions on the role. 8. BOARD MEMBER AND STAFF REPORTS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 8   (John) March meeting aligns with Spring Break. Stated they have forgone this meeting before due to low attendance and not hitting quorum. It was determined that enough Board members will be there to have quorum. 9. OTHER BUSINESS  Q (Renee) Block 23 property is an eyesore to the community and has heard complains about that area looking worse; what is the City going to do about it?  A (Josh) It is owned by a local landowner who was working on a plan for high-density senior housing with a significant memory care section and retail on the ground flooring with parking tucked behind it. Conversations were strong before the pandemic. The City can take action. Once a complaint is submitted and verified, a letter is then sent to the property owner, there is time given to take corrective action by either taking care of the issue or submitting a plan to take care of the issue. If they fail to do so, the city can go in and fix the issue and then bill the owner. It can be a while before complaints are resolved due to needing to give the owner time.  Q (Denny)- Saw there was a partnership between CSU and a private incubator on North College to develop or expand an energy high tech incubator; is the City involved in it and how often does CSU participate in those kind of projects?  A (Josh) The City is aware and involved through our urban renewal authority areas. Clay Frickey is currently the lead City representative on the project. It is known as Powerhouse 2. Powerhouse 1 is the old municipal powerplant the City still owns and leases to CSU; that has been a great partnership with them. Powerhouse 2 is a little different where it has more private money. It is affiliated with CSU but not a direct CSU project like Powerhouse 1 was. It will be complimentary and supportive of those actives as they need more room.  Q (Renee) Will it be a lead building too?  A (Josh) Dr. Wilson is hoping to shoot past lead and be more regenerative and have it give back. Clay would be a better resource. If this is something you are interested in learning more about. We could see if Dr. Wilson could come and do a presentation to this group or have Clay talk about how the City is looking to support that project. It is still early as they just assembled all the land. They are still working through the planning process.  Comment (Renee) Agrees that it is a great idea to have Dr. Wilson come talk about his department and some of the work they are doing  Comment (Blake) CSU just finished their strategic plan and think there are conversations that talked about the intersections with the community. ID areas – Blake shared in chat. Includes Foothills Campus, Powerhouse 1, and NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 02/16/22 – MINUTES Page 9  other spaces that are off campus. How we are doing smart growth in a city that is full but making affordable for students. No good action plan yet just wanted to be transparent on how they will approach those issues. 10. ADJOURN - 7:52 pm