Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_DTPG_06.24.2019Minutes of Meeting of the Downtown Parking Garage Stakeholder Steering Committee Meeting City of Georgetown, Texas June 24, 2019 The Downtown Parking Garage Stakeholder Steering Committee met on Wednesday, June 24, 2019 at 12:00 PM in the Community Room at City Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr Street, Georgetown, Texas. The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King Jr Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Board Members Present: Michael Walton, Co -Chair Linda McCalla, Co -Chair Mickie Ross Scott Firth Larry Olson Shawn Hood Chris Damon Kay Briggs Others present: Ruth Roberts Kay Scharff Lucas Adams Legislative Regular Agenda City Staff Present: Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Eric Johnson, CIP Manager Amanda Still, Arts & Culture Coordinator Danella Elliott, Executive Assistant Kim McAuliffe, Downtown Development Manager Michael Walton, Chair, called the meeting to order at 12:11 p.m.. A Background on the existing Parking Study — Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager Laurie thanked everyone for agreeing to be on this Steering Committee. She introduced herself and explained that the members were selected because they all have expressed an interest and have a passion for our downtown. Each member introduced themselves, and City of Georgetown staff that were present introduced themselves. Laurie said that they were here to support the committee. She said that our goal is to get the committee's input on how to get public support so that we can provide recommendations on the design, but also how to approach the public. We want to give the best and most representative feedback to the Council. She noted that we do not have a contract for design, just for feasibility. We had an engineer evaluate the sight and went above and beyond and did conceptual renderings, but she wanted to clarify that those were just conceptual drawings, and we do not have a contract at this time. Laurie said that we would be very informal with the agenda. B Current status report — Eric Johnson, CII' Manager Background — Parking Study done in 2015 with Carl Walker (now WGI) as the consultant. They came during different periods throughout the year. He provided an overview of their study in June of 2015. They held stakeholder interviews, as well as public workshops and an online survey. From the online survey, 86% of the customers were willing to walk the 1-2 blocks; business owners were less likely to want to do that. 60% of the business owners would rather park on the street. Eric answered questions about the boundaries and areas that were included in the survey. He explained that because the study was done in 2014, with results being delivered in 2015, there were a lot less businesses right off of the square that are there now. The point of the study was to decide what we needed then, and what we needed in the future. Laurie explained that Council was hearing a lot of feedback that we needed more parking or a parking garage, so we hired professionals to come in and assess the situation. There were some short-term strategy suggestions, such as utilizing the 150 space lot at MLK and 8', utilizing parking ambassadors in the downtown 3-hour zone area, and to have better communication with partners, such as the DGA and Williamson County. Other strategies were to reconfigure existing parking to maximize utilizations and form partnerships with privately held parking lots to allow public parking after 5:00 p.m. We have now named the parking lots and have better parking and traffic management for festivals. It was explained that the parking study did not say that we needed a parking garage immediately, just that people were unwilling to pay for parking because you could find a place to park, it may just be further and take a little more time. Also, the future is unclear about long-term parking arrangements due to ride -share programs, etc. Laurie explained that if you are using it as a revenue source, some of the tax-exempt bonding isn't available to the City anymore. Eric also went over some suggested mid-term (pedestrian access/safety on west side of Austin Avenue, improved sidewalks along 8th Street, improved lighting on sidewalks and parking lots and utilizing shuttle services during smaller special events) and long-term strategies (partnering with the County to understand long-term facility plan and structured parking). Eric went over the presentation to Council given in January 2019. WGI was hired to do a feasibility study on the property. Eric explained that the parking garage location would be behind the old Municipal Court/Council building. Based on the conceptual design, the parking garage would have 212 parking spaces, which is a net gain of about 150 parking spaces. Eric answered some questions on going below grade. He explained that if you do that, you have to have additional forced air, basically an 14VAC system. This is a very large maintenance item and electric draw. He also addressed parking spaces that will be utilized during construction for the crane, etc. After construction, we would be able to put parking spaces back in, it would just be smaller, or develop it into something else. Laurie explained that financial obligations drive design and a cost benefit of maximizing space. It was suggested to maybe use the spaces marked for storage (in the conceptual design) for parking and utilize storage units at another location to store items for special events, etc. Eric showed some conceptual drawings. Kay Briggs said that she really liked the looks of the crepe myrtles on the renderings and the ideas presented. Others liked the examples with art on garage to soften the look, and the fact that it could be changed out. C Parameters of downtown development - Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Eric went over some of the information presented to HARC in January. He said that there were some concerns about a huge 4-story parking garage. Eric explained that it is a 4-level (which is much shorter), not a 4-story. He showed the plans for the design HARC approved on January 28"' the design plans for the old Municipal Court building. Laurie reminded the group that they were not being asked to provide a design. It was suggested to have shadow diagrams of Galaxy Bakery, etc. as we get further down the road. D Downtown Design Guideline basics — Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Sofia went over the high points of Downtown Design Guidelines, explaining that they are not a rigid set of rules, but guidance for development in the downtown, i.e., a framework for how we judge developments in downtown and Old Town. She clarified that they stick to the guidelines, and explained the difference between guidelines and requirements. She explained that the TIRZ guidelines are not codified as in code language in the UDC. They use the guidelines and report if the requests "meet or do not meet". She went over the presentation, which outlined design goals for areas and projects to be constructed. She noted that not every guideline can be met on every structure. Sometimes things are just not practical or appropriate and they have to look at the intent of the project. Discussion followed on the guideline suggestion for retail on the bottom. Sofia said she could bring more information on scale and massing if needed. Sofia noted that height allowed in mixed use downtown is 40 feet. E Discussion and possible action for design ideas (possibly including art) — Kim McAuliffe, Downtown Development Manager Kim McAuliffe showed some examples of various types of art, etc. for the exterior of the parking garage. She said they are just to create inspiration and get everyone's creative juices flowing. Pictures are iconic for Georgetown, with inspiration from other cities. The examples were well -received. Some additional suggestions/comments were: • look for features that stand out and go with original design • landscaping to hide the levels • public art gets people interested • reflect the character of the community and uniqueness of our city • banner screens (could be changed; hides and creates visual interest) • provide interesting views/sights (don't have to stick to one type of medium) • stone exterior vs. brick seems to fit better with the aesthetics of downtown • cultural district; fabulous history in Georgetown; cool to have photos / sepias of different people; perfect opportunity to represent our culture/history • love to see some aspect of culture/history; tell our story recommend art to tell the story of Georgetown; make it local • have display boxes on the first level • changes occur all the time; architecture is art also; let the building's architecture tell our story ■ tell story of our people written in stone; each bldg. is a reflection of ideas and our culture that built it. ■ dress up the parking garage; ability to create most significant architectural project; something we can all culturally be proud of G Discussion and feedback on holding public meetings — Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager What ideas and feedback do you have immediately for design? What ideas for public input? What additional information would you like to see for the next meeting? • It was suggested to have shadow diagrams of Galaxy Bakery, etc. as we get further down the road. • Sofia said she could bring more information on scale and massing if needed. • Goal is to get clear story and come up with something simplified • Create an information kit for public input process ( On the Table format, etc) • Look at feasibility for utilizing 7" street parking area • Additional ideas for building architectural elements/cultural input and art ideas ■ Explore retail component; very specific; (possibly have Visitor's Center on bottom level with shirts/brochures, etc. • Pop-up shop/kiosk/very small footprint business opportunity, etc. • Explain why retail on bottom wasn't considered (small retail) • Not open houses but mirror what Sofa did at 14ARC (various times 6:00 and 8:00 - presentation with public participation and discussion went smoothly and was educational) r Alternative approach; creating information kit and city staff available across the city; simplify the story; clearer story with no technical information The group agreed that future meetings would work best later in the afternoon, around 3:00 or4:00 p.m. The meeting adjpurned at 1:33 p.m. 7 W tan Linda McCalla a- -hair Board Co -Chair _q-2Z 11 Date